Kirill Fedorov:
In this article I’ll discuss different strategies for incrementally adding Rust into a server written in another language, such as JavaScript, Python, Java, Go, PHP, Ruby, etc.
I think all of the strategies are good, but Tier 3 stands out as being the best bang for the buck. If you can use an off-the-shelf binding generator library then writing a native function in Rust is super easy and it can have a profound effect on performance.
This is an interesting case study to read alongside Nolan Lawson’s recent post: Why I’m skeptical of rewriting JavaScript tools in “faster” languages:
One reason for my skepticism is that I just don’t think we’ve exhausted all the possibilities of making JavaScript tools faster. Marvin Hagemeister has done an excellent job of demonstrating this, by showing how much low-hanging fruit there is in ESLint, Tailwind, etc.
In the browser world, JavaScript has proven itself to be “fast enough” for most workloads. Sure, WebAssembly exists, but I think it’s fair to say that it’s mostly used for niche, CPU-intensive tasks rather than for building a whole website. So why are JavaScript-based CLI tools rushing to throw JavaScript away?
Now I will admit the posts are talking about different applications: CLI tools vs. web servers but they both consider performance. In Kirill’s post the Rust rewrite has 4.93× the request throughput, which I think supports Nolan’s thesis. However, the Rust version does it using 13 MB of RAM compared to 1.35 GB for the node.js version!