Skip to content
Benchmarking different Node.js routers
Fetching latest commit…
Cannot retrieve the latest commit at this time.
Failed to load latest commit information.

Node.js Router Benchmarks

I have a 6 month old node.js app that was built in a time of fear, uncertainty, and limited server resources. I thought that we should be squeezing as much as possible out of the single VPS we had, so I ended up using a homegrown regex-based router. Now that we want to bring some more structure to the app, I started looking at routers and discovered there were a bunch of options.


npm install
node [router-name].js
# Single (first) route
ab -kc 15 -n 5000
# 20th route
ab -kc 15 -n 5000


It uses a convoluted system where you call router.first() to give you a set of params. Then you're on your own to call the right controller function. It's the only one that doesn't seem to do this, so maybe I'm doing something wrong. It also has the unique feature that you can fire all matching routes, though I can't think of a use case for doing so.


Pretty traditional clean syntax, similar to the others.


Regex-based routes. I'm not a huge fan of passing the routes in a big array, but it works fine. Falls off pretty sharply with lots of routes.


More than just a router, it's a middleware. It uses rails-style routes. Attaches params to the request object.


While it's built on top of connect, it replaces and is actually faster than connect's own router. (most likely due to the routing cache)


Journey is actually json-only, which makes it less suitable for our purposes. All of the hoops to jump through aren't worth not having to call JSON.stringify(), especially since it means that you can't return non-json responses.


This is just a really hacky router that loops through regexes. It's the fastest, but you probably shouldn't use it.


router            first route  20th route
barista           3724         869
choreographer     6024         5825
clutch            6148         2959
connect           5633         5180
escort            6098         5946
journey           5645         5050
regex             6940         6658


Of the seven routers tested, 5 of them were pretty close together. Barista looks like it's slower because of all of the string manipulation it does prior to the regex check. Since it has to do that on each route before it bails and tries the next one, performance decreases much more quickly as more routes are added. Compare what barista does in its check:

// let's chop off the QS to make life easier
var url = require('url').parse(urlParam)
var path = url.pathname
var params = {method:method}

for (var key in self.params) { params[key] = self.params[key] }

// if the method doesn't match, gtfo immediately
if (typeof self.method != 'undefined' && self.method != params.method) return false

/* TODO: implement substring checks for possible performance boost */

// if the route doesn't match the regex, gtfo
if (!self.test(path)) {
  return false

... to what choreographer does in its check, where each route is just a regex:

var matches = route.exec(path);

for(var i = 0; i < len; i += 1)
  //say '/foo/bar/baz' matches '/foo/*/*'
  var route = _routes[i], matches = route.exec(path);
  if(matches) //then matches would be ['/foo/bar/baz','bar','baz']
  { ... }

Some routers, like escort, also keep a cache for dynamic routes that most likely accounts for their higher performance. Since routing doesn't generally change that much during app execution, it's a pretty safe optimization.

Keep in mind that this is a microbenchmark, and as such, the conclusions that can be drawn are limited in scope. I just wanted to see what sort of request overhead each router added, and how req/s falls off as the number of routes grows.

I think we're going to end up choosing connect + escort. Many of the routers are pretty close to the regex parsing speed, and connect provides enough other benefits that I think it's worth using on a larger-scale project.

Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.