Benchmark: vwd streamer - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var fields = [];

for (var i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
    fields[i] = 'vwdId-' + i + '.vwdField';
}

// create duplications
fields = fields.concat(fields, fields);

Tests:

Origin code
var _streamerInstance = { _subscribe: function () {}, _unsubscribe: function () {}, _getCachedValue: function () {}, _update: function () {} }; var _subscribedFields = {}; var subscribe = function (fields) { if (!fields) { return } else if (typeof fields === "string") { fields = [fields] } var duplicateSubscriptions = []; for (var fieldIndex = 0; fieldIndex < fields.length; fieldIndex++) { var fieldName = fields[fieldIndex]; if (_subscribedFields[fieldName]) { duplicateSubscriptions.push(fieldIndex) } else { _subscribedFields[fieldName] = true } var cachedValue = _streamerInstance._getCachedValue(fieldName); if (cachedValue != null) { _streamerInstance._update(cachedValue.dataName, cachedValue.value, cachedValue.dataType, this) } } if (duplicateSubscriptions.length > 0) { fields = fields.slice(0); for (var i = duplicateSubscriptions.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) { fields.splice(duplicateSubscriptions[i], 1) } } _streamerInstance._subscribe(fields); } var unsubscribe = function (fields) { if (!fields) { return } else if (typeof fields === "string") { fields = [fields] } var invalidFields = []; for (var fieldIndex = 0; fieldIndex < fields.length; fieldIndex++) { var fieldName = fields[fieldIndex]; if (_subscribedFields[fieldName]) { delete _subscribedFields[fieldName] } else { invalidFields.push(fieldIndex) } } if (invalidFields.length > 0) { fields = fields.slice(0); for (var i = invalidFields.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) { fields.splice(invalidFields[i], 1) } } _streamerInstance._unsubscribe(fields); }; subscribe(fields); unsubscribe(fields);
Optimized code
var _streamerInstance = { _subscribe: function () {}, _unsubscribe: function () {}, _getCachedValue: function () {}, _update: function () {} }; var _subscribedFields = {}; var subscribe = function (fields) { if (!fields) { return } else if (typeof fields === "string") { fields = [fields] } var fieldsToSubscribe = []; var fieldsToSubscribeCount = 0; var length = fields.length; for (var fieldIndex = 0; fieldIndex < length; fieldIndex++) { var fieldName = fields[fieldIndex]; if (!_subscribedFields[fieldName]) { fieldsToSubscribe[fieldsToSubscribeCount] = fieldName; fieldsToSubscribeCount++; _subscribedFields[fieldName] = true } var cachedValue = _streamerInstance._getCachedValue(fieldName); if (cachedValue != null) { _streamerInstance._update(cachedValue.dataName, cachedValue.value, cachedValue.dataType, this) } } _streamerInstance._subscribe(fieldsToSubscribe); } var unsubscribe = function (fields) { if (!fields) { return } else if (typeof fields === "string") { fields = [fields] } var fieldsToUnsubscribe = []; var fieldsToUnsubscribeCount = 0; var length = fields.length; for (var fieldIndex = 0; fieldIndex < length; fieldIndex++) { var fieldName = fields[fieldIndex]; if (_subscribedFields[fieldName]) { fieldsToUnsubscribe[fieldsToUnsubscribeCount] = fieldName; fieldsToUnsubscribeCount++; delete _subscribedFields[fieldName] } } _streamerInstance._unsubscribe(fieldsToUnsubscribe); }; subscribe(fields); unsubscribe(fields);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Origin code
Optimized code

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition provides the setup for the test cases. It defines a JavaScript object `streamerInstance` with methods `_subscribe`, `_unsubscribe`, `_getCachedValue`, and `_update`. The test case also creates an object `_subscribedFields` to keep track of subscribed fields.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Origin code**
This test case uses the original implementation with the `duplicateSubscriptions` array to optimize field removals.
2. **Optimized code**
This test case uses a modified implementation that avoids the need for the `duplicateSubscriptions` array, which reduces the overhead of removing fields.

**Comparison**

The two test cases are compared in terms of their execution performance, measured by the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond).

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Origin code**
	* Pros:
		+ Easier to understand and maintain due to its simplicity.
	* Cons:
		+ Less efficient due to the use of `duplicateSubscriptions` array, which can lead to slower performance.
2. **Optimized code**
	* Pros:
		+ More efficient than the original implementation due to reduced overhead when removing fields.
	* Cons:
		+ More complex and harder to understand, making it more challenging to maintain.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark result shows that the optimized code outperforms the origin code by a significant margin. This suggests that the modifications made to the `unsubscribe` function have a substantial impact on performance.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark definition, but it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines might have specific optimizations or features that could affect the execution performance of these test cases.

**Device and Browser Variations**

The benchmark result includes variations across different devices (Mac OS X 10.13.4) and browsers (Safari 11). This highlights the importance of testing on diverse platforms to ensure compatibility and performance consistency.

By analyzing this benchmark, we can conclude that optimizations in the `unsubscribe` function can lead to significant improvements in execution performance, but these changes should be carefully considered to balance performance with maintainability and readability.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_4) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/11.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 11 on Mac OS X 10.13.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Origin code	1019.8 Ops/sec
Optimized code	2475.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

vwd streamer (version: 0)

Subscribe & Unsubscribe methods

Comparing performance of: Origin code vs Optimized code

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Origin code

Optimized code

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):