RustAPI Benchmarks

This folder contains performance tests for the RustAPI framework.

🎯 Benchmark Types

1. Micro-benchmarks (Criterion.rs)

Tests the internal components of the framework:

• Routing: URL matching speed
• JSON Serialization: Serialize/deserialize performance
• Extractors: Path, Query, Json extractor speeds

2. HTTP Load Testing

End-to-end performance with real HTTP requests:

• Hello World: Simple text response
• JSON Response: JSON serialized response
• Path Parameters: Dynamic route parameters
• JSON Parsing: Request body parsing

🚀 Running Benchmarks

Micro-benchmarks

cargo bench

HTTP Load Tests (Automated Script)

# Run the automated benchmark script
.\benches\run_benchmarks.ps1

📈 RustAPI vs Actix-web Comparison

Feature	RustAPI	Actix-web	Axum	FastAPI (Python)
Performance	~92k req/s	~105k	~100k	~12k
DX (Simplicity)	🟢 High	🔴 Low	🟡 Medium	🟢 High
Boilerplate	Zero	High	Medium	Zero
AI/LLM Native	✅ Yes	❌ No	❌ No	❌ No
Stability Logic	🛡️ Facade	⚠️ Direct	⚠️ Direct	✅ Stable

Note: Benchmarks depend on system environment. These results were taken on a developer machine with 1000 requests and 5 concurrency.

🔥 Why RustAPI?

When compared to Actix-web, RustAPI offers:

✅ Advantages

1. Developer Experience (DX): FastAPI-like ergonomics
2. Automatic OpenAPI: Documentation is automatically generated as you write code
3. Built-in Validation: Automatic 422 errors with #[validate] macros
4. Simpler API: Less boilerplate, more readable code
5. Hyper 1.0: Modern and stable HTTP stack

📊 Performance

• RustAPI delivers near Actix-web performance in raw speed (90-95%)
• This difference is negligible in real-world applications
• DX gains are more valuable than the small performance difference

🎯 When to Use RustAPI?

• API-first projects
• Projects requiring OpenAPI/Swagger documentation
• Rapid prototyping
• JSON-heavy REST APIs

🎯 When to Use Actix-web?

• Maximum raw performance is critical
• WebSocket-heavy applications
• Large projects requiring a mature ecosystem