this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
178 points (94.1% liked)

Programming

17484 readers
56 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

My first experience with Lemmy was thinking that the UI was beautiful, and lemmy.ml (the first instance I looked at) was asking people not to join because they already had 1500 users and were struggling to scale.

1500 users just doesn't seem like much, it seems like the type of load you could handle with a Raspberry Pi in a dusty corner.

Are the Lemmy servers struggling to scale because of the federation process / protocols?

Maybe I underestimate how much compute goes into hosting user generated content? Users generate very little text, but uploading pictures takes more space. Users are generating millions of bytes of content and it's overloading computers that can handle billions of bytes with ease, what happened? Am I missing something here?

Or maybe the code is just inefficient?

Which brings me to the title's question: Does Lemmy benefit from using Rust? None of the problems I can imagine are related to code execution speed.

If the federation process and protocols are inefficient, then everything is being built on sand. Popular protocols are hard to change. How often does the HTTP protocol change? Never. The language used for the code doesn't matter in this case.

If the code is just inefficient, well, inefficient Rust is probably slower than efficient Python or JavaScript. Could the complexity of Rust have pushed the devs towards a simpler but less efficient solution that ends up being slower than garbage collected languages? I'm sure this has happened before, but I don't know anything about the Lemmy code.

Or, again, maybe I'm just underestimating the amount of compute required to support 1500 users sharing a little bit of text and a few images?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] knoland@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (14 children)

The real benefit as I see it for using rust for backends is memory safety.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] ruffsl@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

As an aside, congratulations! This thread was cross posted to Hacker News:

[–] yourstruly@dataterm.digital 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

Hear me out, but I believe that using Rust holds Lemmy back.

Writing Rust code is difficult, and fairly time consuming. It's difficult to get right, and as other commenters have noted, Lemmy code seems to do a lot of things for the "hype factor" (like Websockets). It's difficult to find enough devs as well.

The article about Discord switching to Rust from Go in the top comment is misleading in my opinion. They totally rearchitected their service while rewriting it, so it's an apples to oranges comparision.

[–] nivenkos@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But Rust is modern. The only real alternatives would be Go or Javascript, Go has a lot more footguns IMO, and Javascript has its own issues with the type system, etc.

The main issues you're talking about are in the lemmy-ui which is not written in Rust, but in InfernoJS / Typescript.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] keardap@lemmy.selfhost.quest 2 points 1 year ago

The only issue I had with Rust is missing libraries.

Whenever I have to go back to Python, a language I used for over 10 years, my productivity goes down.

Rust is by far the best language I worked with and after going through the CS curriculum in uni, learning Rust taken a few hours here in there in my free time.

[–] snaggen@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

I think you are getting things backwards.... Learning to write rust might be hard, if you are not used to typed languages or languages with explicit memory management with stack/heap separation. However, writing rust is not hard. It might take slightly longer in the coding phase, since you are forced to do things correct, you need to handle errors and are not allowed to share data between threads in dangerous ways aso. But that makes the resulting software a lot better, which means that the testing and support is a lot less. So, if anything, the net result of writing software in rust is that it is easier, since you are not allowed to shoot your self in the foot over and over again.

And remember, that every time rust is making your life difficult, you might have introduced a subtle bug in another language.

[–] johnofthesea@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It’s difficult to get right

It is actually really easy. I wanted to rewrite my old rust coded that I did while I was learning it. But when I checked it after about year I have found that it was pretty decent.

Compiler really did help (actually more like clippy/rust-analyzer in that case).

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›