On 10 February 2016 at 10:49, Sönke Ludwig < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:

> Am 10.02.2016 um 09:50 schrieb Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce:
>
>>
>> Not a problem.  We may be on 2.068 sooner than you think (I know that 2.067 has been in branch/PR forever ;-)
>>
>> Iain.
>>
>
> Really glad to hear that! BTW, is anything moving w.r.t. integrating GDC (and LDC) to the auto tester for the DMD frontend?
>

Don't think so.  We have Travis CI building DMD with GDC and LDC for each PR, however I don't know whether or not the auto-tester takes the success/failure of these builds into account.

Did some benchmarks between `std.net.curl.get` and `vibe.http.client.requestHTTP`. Only GET requests.

100 requests, ~1.4mb file:

    curl total: 131304, average: 1 sec and 313 ms
    vibe total:  21975, average: 219 ms

52 different files:

    curl total: 24851, average: 477 ms
    vibe total: 11290, average: 217 ms

50 different files (excluded 2 of the biggest ones):

    curl total: 20892, average: 417 ms
    vibe total: 11368, average: 227 ms

(Looks like `std.net.curl.get` doesn't like if file is bigger than ~1mb.)

Is vibe.d's API really that fast? Or am I doing something wrong?

Am 11.02.2016 um 00:24 schrieb sigod:
> Did some benchmarks between `std.net.curl.get` and
> `vibe.http.client.requestHTTP`. Only GET requests.
>
> 100 requests, ~1.4mb file:
>
>      curl total: 131304, average: 1 sec and 313 ms
>      vibe total:  21975, average: 219 ms
>
> 52 different files:
>
>      curl total: 24851, average: 477 ms
>      vibe total: 11290, average: 217 ms
>
> 50 different files (excluded 2 of the biggest ones):
>
>      curl total: 20892, average: 417 ms
>      vibe total: 11368, average: 227 ms
>
> (Looks like `std.net.curl.get` doesn't like if file is bigger than ~1mb.)
>
> Is vibe.d's API really that fast? Or am I doing something wrong?

How fast was the network connection in that case? Could it make a difference if keep-alive connections are used or not? Were the requests done in parallel or in sequence? I certainly wouldn't expect curl to be slower for a simple sequential transfer of a single file, but who knows.

On Sunday, 14 February 2016 at 08:17:34 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
> Am 11.02.2016 um 00:24 schrieb sigod:
>> Did some benchmarks between `std.net.curl.get` and
>> `vibe.http.client.requestHTTP`. Only GET requests.
>>
>> 100 requests, ~1.4mb file:
>>
>>      curl total: 131304, average: 1 sec and 313 ms
>>      vibe total:  21975, average: 219 ms
>>
>> 52 different files:
>>
>>      curl total: 24851, average: 477 ms
>>      vibe total: 11290, average: 217 ms
>>
>> 50 different files (excluded 2 of the biggest ones):
>>
>>      curl total: 20892, average: 417 ms
>>      vibe total: 11368, average: 227 ms
>>
>> (Looks like `std.net.curl.get` doesn't like if file is bigger than ~1mb.)
>>
>> Is vibe.d's API really that fast? Or am I doing something wrong?
>
> How fast was the network connection in that case? Could it make a difference if keep-alive connections are used or not? Were the requests done in parallel or in sequence? I certainly wouldn't expect curl to be slower for a simple sequential transfer of a single file, but who knows.

https://gist.github.com/sigod/c78c61ac6118fa9fda26

I'm getting something like this:

	HTTPS:
	curl total: 23401, average: 458ms
	vibe total: 12136, average: 237ms
	HTTP:
	curl total: 5577, average: 278ms
	vibe total: 4268, average: 213ms

Windows 7 x86, dmd 2.070.0