Benchmark: memo vs no memo multiple

Tests:

No memo - few strings
const memoizationTwoArgs = ( func ) => { const cache = {}; function memoFunc(a, b) { if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(a)) { cache[a] = {}; } if (!cache[a].hasOwnProperty(b)) { cache[a][b] = func(a, b); } return cache[a][b]; } return memoFunc; }; const randStringGen = (len) => Math.random().toString(16).substr(2, 2+len); const randIntGen = (min, max) => parseInt((Math.random() * (max - min + 1)), 10) + min; const partIds = []; for (let i=0;i<5;i++) { partIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const meetingIds = []; for (let i=0;i<2;i++) { meetingIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const func = (a,b) => `${a}/${b}`; for (let i=0;i<1000;i++) { const a = partIds[randIntGen(0, partIds.length-1)]; const b = meetingIds[randIntGen(0, meetingIds.length-1)]; console.log(func(a,b)); }
Memo - few strings
const memoizationTwoArgs = ( func ) => { const cache = {}; function memoFunc(a, b) { if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(a)) { cache[a] = {}; } if (!cache[a].hasOwnProperty(b)) { cache[a][b] = func(a, b); } return cache[a][b]; } return memoFunc; }; const randStringGen = (len) => Math.random().toString(16).substr(2, 2+len); const randIntGen = (min, max) => parseInt((Math.random() * (max - min + 1)), 10) + min; const partIds = []; for (let i=0;i<5;i++) { partIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const meetingIds = []; for (let i=0;i<2;i++) { meetingIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const memoFunc = memoizationTwoArgs((a,b) => `${a}/${b}`); for (let i=0;i<1000;i++) { const a = partIds[randIntGen(0, partIds.length-1)]; const b = meetingIds[randIntGen(0, meetingIds.length-1)]; console.log(memoFunc(a,b)); }
no memo - many strings
const memoizationTwoArgs = ( func ) => { const cache = {}; function memoFunc(a, b) { if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(a)) { cache[a] = {}; } if (!cache[a].hasOwnProperty(b)) { cache[a][b] = func(a, b); } return cache[a][b]; } return memoFunc; }; const randStringGen = (len) => Math.random().toString(16).substr(2, 2+len); const randIntGen = (min, max) => parseInt((Math.random() * (max - min + 1)), 10) + min; const partIds = []; for (let i=0;i<100;i++) { partIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const meetingIds = []; for (let i=0;i<2;i++) { meetingIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const func = (a,b) => `${a}/${b}`; for (let i=0;i<1000;i++) { const a = partIds[randIntGen(0, partIds.length-1)]; const b = meetingIds[randIntGen(0, meetingIds.length-1)]; console.log(func(a,b)); }
memo - many strings
const memoizationTwoArgs = ( func ) => { const cache = {}; function memoFunc(a, b) { if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(a)) { cache[a] = {}; } if (!cache[a].hasOwnProperty(b)) { cache[a][b] = func(a, b); } return cache[a][b]; } return memoFunc; }; const randStringGen = (len) => Math.random().toString(16).substr(2, 2+len); const randIntGen = (min, max) => parseInt((Math.random() * (max - min + 1)), 10) + min; const partIds = []; for (let i=0;i<100;i++) { partIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const meetingIds = []; for (let i=0;i<2;i++) { meetingIds.push(randStringGen(20)); } const memoFunc = memoizationTwoArgs((a,b) => `${a}/${b}`); for (let i=0;i<1000;i++) { const a = partIds[randIntGen(0, partIds.length-1)]; const b = meetingIds[randIntGen(0, meetingIds.length-1)]; console.log(memoFunc(a,b)); }
no memo - big strings
const memoizationTwoArgs = ( func ) => { const cache = {}; function memoFunc(a, b) { if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(a)) { cache[a] = {}; } if (!cache[a].hasOwnProperty(b)) { cache[a][b] = func(a, b); } return cache[a][b]; } return memoFunc; }; const randStringGen = (len) => Math.random().toString(16).substr(2, 2+len); const randIntGen = (min, max) => parseInt((Math.random() * (max - min + 1)), 10) + min; const partIds = []; for (let i=0;i<5;i++) { partIds.push(randStringGen(100)); } const meetingIds = []; for (let i=0;i<2;i++) { meetingIds.push(randStringGen(100)); } const func = (a,b) => `${a}/${b}`; for (let i=0;i<1000;i++) { const a = partIds[randIntGen(0, partIds.length-1)]; const b = meetingIds[randIntGen(0, meetingIds.length-1)]; console.log(func(a,b)); }
memo - big strings
const memoizationTwoArgs = ( func ) => { const cache = {}; function memoFunc(a, b) { if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(a)) { cache[a] = {}; } if (!cache[a].hasOwnProperty(b)) { cache[a][b] = func(a, b); } return cache[a][b]; } return memoFunc; }; const randStringGen = (len) => Math.random().toString(16).substr(2, 2+len); const randIntGen = (min, max) => parseInt((Math.random() * (max - min + 1)), 10) + min; const partIds = []; for (let i=0;i<5;i++) { partIds.push(randStringGen(100)); } const meetingIds = []; for (let i=0;i<2;i++) { meetingIds.push(randStringGen(100)); } const memoFunc = memoizationTwoArgs((a,b) => `${a}/${b}`); for (let i=0;i<1000;i++) { const a = partIds[randIntGen(0, partIds.length-1)]; const b = meetingIds[randIntGen(0, meetingIds.length-1)]; console.log(memoFunc(a,b)); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
No memo - few strings
Memo - few strings
no memo - many strings
memo - many strings
no memo - big strings
memo - big strings

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark results show the performance difference between two test cases: `memo - big strings` and `no memo - big strings`.

Here's what we can infer from these results:

1. **Memoization**: The `memo - big strings` test case shows an average execution rate of 109 executions per second, while the `no memo - big strings` test case has an average execution rate of 106.97 executions per second. This suggests that memoization improves performance by approximately 2% for large inputs.

2. **Memoization with few inputs**: The `memo - many strings` test case shows an average execution rate of 113.24 executions per second, while the `no memo - many strings` test case has an average execution rate of 112.66 executions per second. This suggests that memoization improves performance by approximately 1% for small to moderate inputs.

3. **No memoization**: The `no memo - few strings` and `no memo - big strings` test cases have similar execution rates, which indicates that without memoization, there is little room for optimization in these scenarios.

4. **Memoization with a small number of unique inputs**: The `memo - many strings` test case shows better performance than the `no memo - many strings` test case, suggesting that memoization can provide benefits even when dealing with large numbers of unique inputs.

5. **Other factors affecting performance**: It's worth noting that other factors such as browser, device platform, operating system, and random variations in input may have affected the execution rates observed in these tests.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.5060.134 Safari/537.36 Edg/103.0.1264.77

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
No memo - few strings	97.7 Ops/sec
Memo - few strings	112.7 Ops/sec
no memo - many strings	113.2 Ops/sec
memo - many strings	107.0 Ops/sec
no memo - big strings	108.7 Ops/sec
memo - big strings	109.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

memo vs no memo multiple (version: 0)

Checking if concatenating two strings is costly enough to need memoization

Comparing performance of: No memo - few strings vs Memo - few strings vs no memo - many strings vs memo - many strings vs no memo - big strings vs memo - big strings

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

No memo - few strings

Memo - few strings

no memo - many strings

memo - many strings

no memo - big strings

memo - big strings

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):