A lot of websockets in Haskell
Some comments:Haskell will use less memory on this task. Since it has a shared heap, it doesn't have to allocate a small heap per process, and thus it is expected that it has lower overhead. Furthermore, static typing means Haskell needs less type tags and this tend to make it win. As the system grows in complexity, these things tend to even out a bit more but I would still expect Haskell to use about half the memory of Erlang.The Elixir numbers for Phoenix sounds off. At 83765 megabytes and 1999984 connections, that is 42 kilobytes per connection. That count is about an order of magnitude over what I would expect it to be. How much of that memory is kernel allocated network buffer space, and how much is buffer space in the Erlang runtime? A "raw" process in Erlang is around 1.5 kilobytes nowadays, including stack and heap, so where do the additional 40 get allocated to? I don't think we have 20 extra processes per connection for some reason :) Definitely something to look into.Tsung is an old application. It isn't really written in ways that makes it efficient at the network level and this shows its head in this benchmark. Furthermore, Tsung does more work than the broadcast in Haskell, so it is expected the load generator will give up long before the server. Again, measure the amount of memory allocated by the kernel and by the userland process in order to determine if it is one or the other you hit first. Still, I would expect Tsung to be the culprit.