Benchmark: Rxjs several pipes vs one 100k without functional array functions at all 123sdfaasd

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://unpkg.com/rxjs@6.5.5/bundles/rxjs.umd.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var rawdata = Array.from(Array(100000).keys()) // 10k numbers 1,2,3,4,5...

Tests:

RxJS one pipe
let { from, Observable } = rxjs; let { flatMap, map, tap, toArray } = rxjs.operators; const data$ = from(rawdata) .pipe( map(values => { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 50; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; }) ) let data; data$.subscribe(d => data = d);
Several pipes
let { from, Observable } = rxjs; let { flatMap, map, tap, toArray } = rxjs.operators; const data$ = from(rawdata) .pipe( map(values => { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; }), map(values => { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; }), map(values => { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; }), map(values => { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; }), map(values => { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; }) ) let data; data$.subscribe(d => data = d);
Many pipes same function
let { from, Observable } = rxjs; let { flatMap, map, tap, toArray } = rxjs.operators; function myOperator(values) { let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { count = count + 1; } return count; } const data$ = from(rawdata) .pipe( map(myOperator), map(myOperator), map(myOperator), map(myOperator), map(myOperator) ) let data; data$.subscribe(d => data = d);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RxJS one pipe
Several pipes
Many pipes same function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark tests three different approaches to perform a simple operation: counting the number of iterations in a loop. The operations are:

1. Using one pipe ( RxJS operators `map` and `tap`) without functional array functions.
2. Using multiple pipes with the same function (`myOperator`) for each iteration.
3. Not using any functional array functions at all.

**Approach 1: One Pipe**

This approach uses a single pipe to perform the operation. The `map` operator is used to transform the data, and the `tap` operator is used to log some information (not actually used in this case). The loop iterates 50 times to increment a counter.

Pros:

* Simple implementation
* Easy to understand

Cons:

* May not be optimized for performance due to the use of multiple iterations in the loop

**Approach 2: Multiple Pipes**

This approach uses multiple pipes with the same function (`myOperator`) for each iteration. The `map` operator is used to apply the function to each element, and the result is passed through subsequent operators.

Pros:

* Can be optimized for performance by reducing the number of iterations in the loop

Cons:

* More complex implementation due to the use of multiple pipes
* May lead to unnecessary computations if not optimized properly

**Approach 3: No Functional Array Functions**

This approach does not use any functional array functions, relying on traditional JavaScript loops and variable assignments.

Pros:

* Often results in faster performance due to the absence of unnecessary function calls and allocations
* Simple implementation

Cons:

* May be less intuitive for developers familiar with functional programming concepts

**Libraries and Features**

The benchmark uses RxJS (Reactive Extensions for JavaScript), a popular library for reactive programming. The `map` operator is used in all three approaches, which applies a transformation function to each element of an observable sequence.

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition, so we won't go into that topic.

**Other Alternatives**

For this type of microbenchmark, other alternatives could include:

* Using `Array.prototype.forEach` instead of loops
* Utilizing Web Workers for parallel processing
* Leveraging modern JavaScript features like `for...of` loops and `Promise.all()`
* Implementing the benchmark using a different library or framework (e.g., Node.js or Ember.js)

Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on the specific requirements of your project, performance considerations, and team expertise.

I hope this explanation helps!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/112.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 112 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RxJS one pipe	22.3 Ops/sec
Several pipes	11.0 Ops/sec
Many pipes same function	10.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Rxjs several pipes vs one 100k without functional array functions at all 123sdfaasd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RxJS one pipe vs Several pipes vs Many pipes same function

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RxJS one pipe

Several pipes

Many pipes same function

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):