Bun / Performance

[PasVegan]

Hi,
Bun 1.0 got out and I thought that you could use it to speed up a lot streamsync ?

video about bun 1.0
their website

[ramedina86]

Hi, I'm not too sure how Bun would apply to Streamsync as the latter doesn't use a server-side JavaScript runtime. The backend is Python, and all the ui/ TypeScript code is transpiled to JavaScript which runs in the browser. JavaScript is only used in the frontend. Unless you're talking about something different?

[PasVegan]

You could use it instead of npm as a package manager for example.
here you talk about npm:
https://www.streamsync.cloud/custom-components.html#developing-templates

You could replace npm by bun. Maybe there are other use case but I am a low level developer so I don't know a lot about the world of javascript :)

[PasVegan]

Also instead of FastAPI/Uvicorn you could use:

• socketify.py which is 1931,85% faster than uvicorn (wow)
• Falcon which is 431,39% faster than uvicorn
• Robyn which is 416,39% faster than uvicorn
• Granian which is 303,15% faster than uvicorn

I think that could skyrocket the performance.
link to benchmark

[mzy2240]

dont think you are going to have that many throughput in your spa

[SurajRaika]

shifting to Bun for Streamsync won't really have any significant impact, at least for the next year or so. Streamsync mainly using it for building purposes, and it won't affect end users in the slightest.

[ramedina86]

Hi, yes I second what @SurajRaika regarding Bun.

Regarding alternatives to FastAPI, this can potentially be very interesting. Streamsync isn't tightly coupled to FastAPI so it'd be relatively straightforward.