Django vs Pyramid vs Flask

Pyramid, Django, and Flask are all superb frameworks, and deciding on just one for a project is hard. The world of Python web structures teems with selections. Django, Flask, Pyramid, Tornado, Bottle, Diesel, Pecan, Falcon, and many more are competing for developer mindshare. As a developer you wish to reduce the hordes of alternatives down to the one that will help you complete your project and jump on to the next level.

Flask is a “microframework” primarily aimed at small applications with simpler needs. Pyramid and Django are both aimed at bigger applications, yet take different techniques to extensibility and adaptability. Pyramid targets flexibility and lets the developer utilize the right tools for their project. This implies the developer could select the database, URL structure, templating style, and more. Django aims to consist of all the batteries a web application will certainly need so programmers require only open the box and begin functioning, pulling in Django’s several components as they go.

Django includes an ORM from the box, while Pyramid and Flask leave it to the developer to decide on how (or if) they desire their data saved. One of the most preferred ORM for non-Django web applications is SQLAlchemy by far, but there are plenty of various other choices from DynamoDB and MongoDB to basic local perseverance like LevelDB or ordinary SQLite. Pyramid is developed to use any type of perseverance layer, even yet-to-be-invented ones.

Frameworks Introduction

Django’s strategy makes it very easy for developers that know Python already to dive in to web applications quickly without needing to make a lot of decisions concerning their application’s framework ahead of time. Django has for templating, types, transmitting, authentication, basic data source management, and much more built in. In contrast, Pyramid includes routing and verification, but templating and data source administration require external collections.

The extra work up front to pick elements for Flask and Pyramid applications generates even more adaptability for programmers whose usage case does not match a common ORM, or which need to interoperate via various workflows or templating systems.

Flask, the youngest of the 3 frameworks, started in mid-2010. The Pyramid framework started life in the Pylons project and got the name Pyramid in late 2010, though the first launch was in 2005. Django had its first launch in 2006, soon after the Pylons (at some point Pyramid) project started. Pyramid and Django are very mature frameworks, and have accumulated plugins and extensions to meet an unbelievably large wide range of demands.

Though Flask has a much shorter history, it has actually been able to pick up from structures that have come before and has adjusted its sights strongly on tiny projects. It is accurately made use of frequently in smaller tasks via merely one or two functions. One such project is httpbin, a simple helper for debugging and testing HTTP collections.


Django has 80,000 StackOverflow questions and a healthy and balanced set of blogs from programmers and power customers. The Flask and Pyramid areas typically aren’t as huge, but their areas are fairly energetic on their subscriber list and on IRC. With just 5,000 StackOverflow concerns tagged, Flask is 15x smaller compared to Django. On Github, they have a virtually identical variety of stars with 11,300 for Django, and 10,900 for Flask.

All 3 frameworks are offered under BSD-derived liberal licenses. Both Flask’s and Django’s licenses are 3-clause BSD, while Pyramid’s Repoze Public License RPL is a derivative of the 4-clause BSD license.


Django and Pyramid both include bootstrapping tools built in. Flask includes absolutely nothing of the kind due to the fact that Flask’s target audience isn’t really trying to build large MVC applications.


Just having a Python application that can respond to HTTP requests is a great start, however it’s a good bet that most of your users won’t be interested in making use of curl to communicate with your web app. Thankfully, all 3 challengers provide a simple means to fill in HTML with custom info, and let folks enjoy your swanky Bootstrap frontend.

Templating lets you inject vibrant information directly into your web page without using making AJAX requests. This is nice from a user experience viewpoint since you only need to make one round-trip to obtain the full page and all its dynamic data. This is especially important on mobile sites where round journeys could take multiple secs.


Pyramid is one of the most flexible of the three. It can be used for little applications as we’ve seen here, yet it likewise powers big-name websites like Dropbox. Open Resource communities like Fedora pick it for applications like their community badges system, which receives information about events from many of the project’s devices to honor achievement-style badges to users. One of one of the most usual complaints concerning Pyramid is that it presents so many options it can be intimidating to start a new project.

By far one of the most popular framework is Django, and the list of sites that utilize it is impressive. Bitbucket, Pinterest, Instagram, and The Onion use Django for all or part of their websites. For websites that have common needs, Django chooses very sane defaults and because of this it has actually become a prominent choice for mid- to large-sized web applications.

Flask is great for developers dealing with small projects that need a fast method to make a simple, Python-powered website. It powers loads of small one-off tools, or simple web interfaces built over existing APIs. Backend projects that need a simple web interface that is fast to develop and will require little configuration often gain from Flask on the frontend, like jitviewer which provides a web interface for inspecting PyPy just-in-time compiler logs.

All three frameworks developed a solution to our small list of requirements, and we’ve been able to see where they vary. Those distinctions aren’t simply aesthetic, and they will transform how you design your product and how fast you ship new features and fixes. Since our instance was small, we’ve seen where Flask shines and how Django can feel clunky on a small scale. Pyramid’s flexibility didn’t become a factor because our requirements stayed the same, but in the real life new requirements are included frequently.

Post a comment