Files
go-telegram/docs/benchmarks/2026-05-10-comparison.md
T
lukaszraczylo 75c7ce3119 perf(client): pool req-body buffer + manual http.Request with cached URL
Two changes that together cut allocs/call from 15 to 13 (client-internal
bench) and per-call CPU from 600ns to 455ns (-24%) on the no-HTTP path:

1. Codec gets an optional BodyEncoder extension (MarshalTo io.Writer).
   When present, encodeJSONBody stream-encodes the request directly into
   a pooled *bytes.Buffer instead of allocating a [2-step] Marshal+Reader
   pair. DefaultCodec implements it via goccy/go-json.NewEncoder.
2. *Bot caches the parsed base URL on construction. buildRequest skips
   net/http.NewRequestWithContext for the common case and constructs
   *http.Request manually — clones the URL by value, sets the method
   path, and populates ContentLength + GetBody from the body's concrete
   type so RetryDoer's body-replay across attempts still works.

Cross-library bench (sendMessage round-trip vs httptest.Server): -2
allocs/call (104 -> 102), bytes -1.2%, time within noise (real HTTP
plumbing dominates). The CPU win is visible on synthetic stub-doer
benches and translates to lower GC pressure on sustained-throughput
workloads.

Slow-path fallback preserved for codecs that don't implement BodyEncoder
and for *Bot instances where url.Parse on the configured base failed —
they take the original NewRequestWithContext path.
2026-05-10 22:36:57 +01:00

7.2 KiB
Raw Blame History

Benchmarks vs top 5 Go Telegram libraries

Date: 2026-05-10 Environment: Apple M4 Max · darwin/arm64 · go1.26.2 Methodology: go test -count=10 -bench=. -benchmem, summarised with benchstat (golang.org/x/perf) Source: test/benchmarks/ · raw output: results/raw.txt · benchstat: results/benchstat.txt

Libraries

Lib Module
ours github.com/lukaszraczylo/go-telegram (this repo)
gotba github.com/go-telegram-bot-api/telegram-bot-api/v5
telebot gopkg.in/telebot.v3 (tucnak)
gobot github.com/go-telegram/bot
telego github.com/mymmrac/telego
echotron github.com/NicoNex/echotron/v3

TL;DR

  • Webhook decode (small Update): ours is 1220% faster than every competitor and ties telego for the lowest alloc count (11).
  • Large Update unmarshal (entities + reply markup + photo array): ours is 1734% faster with the lowest ns/op of all six. telego edges us on alloc count (31 vs 34) at the cost of ~17% more time.
  • API call round-trip (mock HTTP server): telego wins (35.8 µs / 48 allocs) thanks to its application/x-www-form-urlencoded shortcut on simple methods; ours is second (39.8 µs / 102 allocs) and beats gotba, telebot, gobot.
  • Dispatcher routing (20 handlers, last matches): ours is 2.52.8× faster than telebot and gobot (98 ns vs 271 / 246 ns).

How to read these numbers

  • One machine, single workload, fixtures defined in shared/fixtures.go. Re-run on your hardware before drawing conclusions.
  • Codecs differ across libs (we use goccy/go-json; most competitors use stdlib encoding/json). Codec choice is part of the library's value prop, so we benchmark each library as it ships, not in some artificial common-codec mode.
  • "Equivalent code path" was chosen via each library's idiomatic public API for the same logical operation. The exact code is in the bench files alongside each BenchmarkXxx_<lib> function — read them.

1. Webhook decode — small Update (text message)

Decode shared.SmallUpdateJSON into the library's typed Update struct.

Lib sec/op B/op allocs/op
ours 1.832 µs ±4% 2.180 KiB 11
gotba 2.082 µs ±0% 1.461 KiB 17
telebot 2.194 µs ±1% 1.773 KiB 17
gobot 2.082 µs ±1% 1.789 KiB 16
telego 2.143 µs ±2% 3.058 KiB 11
echotron 2.039 µs ±1% 1.680 KiB 16

Notes. We use slightly more bytes because typed unions and the typed []UpdateType allocate richer Go values. We win on time and tie telego on alloc count.

2. Large Update unmarshal — entities + reply markup + photo array

Decode shared.LargeUpdateJSON (text + 3 entities + 2x3 inline keyboard + 3-size photo array). Stresses each library's union/discriminator decoding.

Lib sec/op B/op allocs/op
ours 6.726 µs ±1% 5.875 KiB 34
gotba 8.066 µs ±1% 3.438 KiB 56
telebot 10.190 µs ±1% 5.594 KiB 60
gobot 8.231 µs ±1% 4.703 KiB 50
telego 7.849 µs ±2% 6.600 KiB 31
echotron 8.123 µs ±1% 4.219 KiB 56

Notes. Despite the typed-union model giving us richer Go values per decode, we still produce them faster than every competitor. telego edges us by 3 allocs but pays 17% more time.

3. API call round-trip — sendMessage against a mock HTTP server

Build params → POST to local httptest.Server returning {"ok":true,"result":Message} → decode response.

Lib sec/op B/op allocs/op
ours 39.83 µs ±4% 11.09 KiB 102
gotba 42.03 µs ±4% 10.97 KiB 125
telebot 43.41 µs ±1% 13.15 KiB 139
gobot 61.19 µs ±1% 13.50 KiB 176
telego 35.84 µs ±1% 6.547 KiB 48
echotron skipped — see below

Notes.

  • telego wins by sending requests as application/x-www-form-urlencoded form data (cheaper than JSON marshal+upload for small payloads), plus an aggressive request-pool. We send JSON over multipart/form-data only when needed; for the JSON case our cost lands between gotba and telego.
  • Our request path runs through a manually-constructed *http.Request with a pre-parsed base URL (cached on *Bot), and request bodies are stream-encoded into a pooled *bytes.Buffer via the optional BodyEncoder codec extension. Together those skip the url.Parse + *http.Request bookkeeping that http.NewRequestWithContext runs on every call.
  • gobot's higher cost comes from per-call goroutine + channel plumbing in its dispatcher path even when called directly.
  • echotron skip: echotron ships built-in dual-level rate limiting (30 req/s global, 20 req/min per chat) on its unexported lclient field. The setters that disable it (SetGlobalRequestLimit, SetChatRequestLimit) are methods on the unexported type with no public accessor through the API value, so the limiter cannot be bypassed without monkey-patching. A naive run produces ~3 s/op driven entirely by the per-chat token bucket — measuring rate limiting, not the library. We skip rather than publish a misleading number. The rate limiter is a feature of echotron and worth knowing about; it just makes a microbench unfair.

4. Dispatcher routing — 20 handlers, last one matches

Register 20 command handlers (/cmd0/cmd19); feed an update matching /cmd19 so the bench measures worst-case filter chain traversal.

Lib sec/op B/op allocs/op
ours 98.46 ns ±2% 128 B 3
telebot 270.9 ns ±2% 678 B 5
gobot 246.1 ns ±1% 48 B 1

Notes. We dispatch ~2.5× faster than telebot and gobot. gobot's single allocation is impressive but its routing decision is slower. telebot's higher cost reflects its richer per-update Context construction.

Coverage caveats.

  • gotba ships no built-in dispatcher; users route via a manual switch on Update fields. Benchmarking that against framework-based dispatchers would be apples-to-oranges, so it's omitted.
  • telego routes via a buffered channel + goroutine pool inside telegohandler.BotHandler. There is no public sync entry point, so the bench would conflate channel + goroutine overhead with routing cost.
  • echotron uses a chat-ID-keyed Dispatcher that fans out to per-chat Bot instances — a different paradigm (stateful per-chat bot loop), not directly comparable to "match this update against N handlers".

How to reproduce

cd test/benchmarks
go test -count=10 -bench=. -benchmem | tee results/raw.txt
benchstat results/raw.txt > results/benchstat.txt

Install benchstat if missing: go install golang.org/x/perf/cmd/benchstat@latest.

Bench code

All bench source lives under test/benchmarks/ as a separate Go module so competitor dependencies stay out of the root go.mod. The fixtures (the JSON each library decodes, the mock HTTP server) are in shared/fixtures.go — every library decodes the same bytes.