# Big performance differences: Debian (Bullseye) vs Alpine-based Redis images (Docker)

**URL:** <https://help.nextcloud.com/t/big-performance-differences-debian-bullseye-vs-alpine-based-redis-images-docker/161723>\
**Category:** 🏷️ General\
**Tags:** docker, performance, alpine\_linux, redis, docker-compose\
**Created:** [May 9, 2023, 1:25am UTC](https://help.nextcloud.com/t/big-performance-differences-debian-bullseye-vs-alpine-based-redis-images-docker/161723 "2023-05-09T01:25:29Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dugite-code](https://help.nextcloud.com/user_avatar/help.nextcloud.com/dugite-code/32/6434_2.png) [@dugite-code](https://help.nextcloud.com/u/dugite-code)\
**Post date:** [May 9, 2023, 8:11am UTC](https://help.nextcloud.com/t/big-performance-differences-debian-bullseye-vs-alpine-based-redis-images-docker/161723/3 "2023-05-09T08:11:04Z")

</div>

I did some reading and found this interesting discussion regarding why there is such a difference

> Yes. It is known that some workloads, mostly involving malloc, and heavy  
> amounts of C string operations benchmark poorly verses glibc.
> 
> This is largely because the security hardening features of musl and  
> Alpine are not zero cost, but also because musl does not contain  
> micro-architecture specific optimizations, meaning that on glibc you  
> might get strlen/strcpy type functions that are hand-tuned for the exact  
> CPU you are using.
> 
> In practice though, performance is adequate for most workloads.

[https://lists.alpinelinux.org/~alpine/users/\<6df8863e77b970b466dbfc9a3a5c2bcec3199f48.camel%40aquilenet.fr\>](https://lists.alpinelinux.org/%7Ealpine/users/%3C6df8863e77b970b466dbfc9a3a5c2bcec3199f48.camel%40aquilenet.fr%3E)

---

_[View the full topic](https://help.nextcloud.com/t/big-performance-differences-debian-bullseye-vs-alpine-based-redis-images-docker/161723)._