Benchmark: querySelector from document or from element

HTML Preparation code:

<html>

<body>
    <div>
        <div>
            <div>
                <div class="element">
                    <div class="test"></div>
                </div>
            </div>
        </div>
    </div>
</body>

</html>

Script Preparation code:

window.element = document.querySelector('.element');

Tests:

querySelector from document
const theHtml = document.querySelector('.test');
querySelector from element
const theHtml = element.querySelector('.test');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
querySelector from document
querySelector from element

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests the performance difference between two approaches to use the `querySelector` method: calling it directly on the `document` object or on an element closer to the target element.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Querying from document**: This approach calls `document.querySelector('.test')`, where `.test` is a CSS selector targeting an element with the class "test".
2. **Querying from element**: This approach uses an intermediate element, `element`, which is set to `document.querySelector('.element')`, and then calls `element.querySelector('.test')`. The intermediate element is created by selecting an element with the class "element" and assigning it to a variable named "element".

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Querying from document**:
	* Pros: This approach is more common and widely supported, as it directly targets the desired element without introducing additional variables.
	* Cons: The `document` object needs to be traversed, which can lead to slower performance in some cases.
2. **Querying from element**:
	* Pros: By using an intermediate element, this approach can potentially improve performance by reducing the number of DOM elements that need to be searched. This is especially true when dealing with complex or deeply nested DOM structures.
	* Cons: The use of a variable (`element`) adds overhead due to memory allocation and management. Additionally, this approach relies on the specific structure of the HTML document, which may not always match expectations.

**Library Usage**

None of the provided benchmark scripts explicitly uses any external libraries. However, it's worth noting that `querySelector` is a part of the DOM API, which is built into modern browsers.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no specific JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. The code adheres to standard ECMAScript syntax and conventions.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to explore alternative approaches or optimize your own benchmarks, consider the following options:

1. **Use a more efficient DOM traversal method**: Depending on the specific requirements of your project, you might be able to improve performance by using techniques like caching, memoization, or optimized DOM traversal methods (e.g., `querySelectorAll` with a query string).
2. **Profile and optimize critical code paths**: Use tools like Chrome DevTools' Profiler or Node.js Inspector to identify performance bottlenecks in your application and optimize those areas specifically.
3. **Use benchmarking libraries**: Libraries like Benchmark.js, Microbenchmark, or jsperf can help you create more comprehensive benchmarks with features like statistical analysis and comparison of multiple approaches.

Keep in mind that the specific optimizations will depend on your project's requirements, target audience, and performance constraints.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
querySelector from document	3871085.8 Ops/sec
querySelector from element	5430846.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

querySelector from document or from element (version: 0)

Figuring out what's faster, using querySelector from document or from an element closer to the wanted element

Comparing performance of: querySelector from document vs querySelector from element

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

querySelector from document

querySelector from element

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):