http://davidcramer.disqus.com/enThu, 18 Sep 2008 11:42:52 -0000http://www.davidcramer.net/code/276/high-performance-django.html#comment-3320691I have just migrated the user home page of <a href="http://mixin.com" rel="nofollow">mixin.com</a> (<a href="http://www.mixin.com/users/ndengler/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mixin.com/users/ndengler/</a>) from django to jinja2 on our test environment. The time used for rendering the template shrunk from ~1000ms to ~400ms (which is still to much). It's more than 2 times faster and we are planning to migrate our complete application on jinja2. I wish I knew jinja2 before!jvisinandThu, 18 Sep 2008 11:42:52 -0000http://www.davidcramer.net/code/276/high-performance-django.html#comment-3320688I wouldn't say they were a major bottleneck, but yes, Curse was using Jinja. It was mostly because of the flexibility Jinja offers over Django.zeegSun, 07 Sep 2008 11:25:43 -0000http://www.davidcramer.net/code/276/high-performance-django.html#comment-3320687Did Curse switch to Jinja? Were templates a major bottleneck?pytechdSun, 07 Sep 2008 10:58:03 -0000http://www.davidcramer.net/code/276/high-performance-django.html#comment-3320690I can't really say what makes it faster, except that it does use some ctypes, and in Jinja2 it compiles down to a module which is really nice.zeegSun, 07 Sep 2008 02:46:18 -0000http://www.davidcramer.net/code/276/high-performance-django.html#comment-3320689What is it that makes jinja so much faster than djangos builtin template engine? Cant the built in by improved to perform better performence??MartinSun, 07 Sep 2008 02:44:57 -0000