Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Gunicorn vs Puma: What are the differences?
Gunicorn: A Python WSGI HTTP Server for UNIX. Gunicorn is a pre-fork worker model ported from Ruby's Unicorn project. The Gunicorn server is broadly compatible with various web frameworks, simply implemented, light on server resources, and fairly speedy; Puma: A Modern, Concurrent Web Server for Ruby. Unlike other Ruby Webservers, Puma was built for speed and parallelism. Puma is a small library that provides a very fast and concurrent HTTP 1.1 server for Ruby web applications.
Gunicorn and Puma can be categorized as "Web Servers" tools.
"Python" is the primary reason why developers consider Gunicorn over the competitors, whereas "Easy" was stated as the key factor in picking Puma.
Gunicorn and Puma are both open source tools. It seems that Gunicorn with 5.96K GitHub stars and 1.12K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Puma with 5.78K GitHub stars and 987 GitHub forks.
Instagram, Fitocracy, and Kippt are some of the popular companies that use Gunicorn, whereas Puma is used by Yammer, Product Hunt, and GrowthHackers. Gunicorn has a broader approval, being mentioned in 184 company stacks & 51 developers stacks; compared to Puma, which is listed in 73 company stacks and 30 developer stacks.
Pros of Gunicorn
- Python31
- Easy setup30
- Reliable7
- Light2
- Fast1
Pros of Puma
- Convenient3
- Free3
- Easy3
- Multithreaded2
- Default Rails server2
- First-class support for WebSockets2
- Consumes less memory than Unicorn2
- Lightweight1
- Fast1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Gunicorn
Cons of Puma
- Uses `select` (limited client count)0