> Java is pretty high performance, usually on par with C++
I'm not convinced. Java I/O is far form perfect, and Kafka is probably very heavy on I/O side.
> and usually faster than e.g. Go.
That's strange, since Go to some degree was intended as replacement for Java without having Java's downsides. Why would Go be less performant?
I'd be interested if someone would write such framework in Rust though. C++ is of course a default expectation, but usage of Java somehow surprises me in this case.
Kahka is written in Scala, not Java. The only Java in the project is for a JavaAPI and hadoop connectors.
Comparing languages in absolute performance terms is bad idea, it's an extreme simplification of what really goes into creating performant applications.
I didn't say it's just "slow". I said it's an expected performance hit in comparison with languages like C++. In some cases that hit is tolerable, in others not.
Right, but even what you said isn't really within shouting distance of reality.
Certainly, many naive people would expect such a performance hit; personally, I'd strongly expect that the actual performance is predicated on the architecture and the expertise of the teams involved and that any differences between the languages become either apples to oranges or noise.
I'd expect an actual performance comparison to be sure, rather than relying on expertise of the teams for assuming it. As much as any claim that difference between languages becomes irrelevant with advancement of the hardware, it still can be relevant in different cases.
I'm not convinced. Java I/O is far form perfect, and Kafka is probably very heavy on I/O side.
> and usually faster than e.g. Go.
That's strange, since Go to some degree was intended as replacement for Java without having Java's downsides. Why would Go be less performant?
I'd be interested if someone would write such framework in Rust though. C++ is of course a default expectation, but usage of Java somehow surprises me in this case.