Benchmark: Does the size of the object being assigned affect performance? - updating case

Tests:

assigning 3 fields
const firstObject = { a: 1, b: '123', c: new Date(), d: 1, e: '456', f: new Date(), g: 1, h: '789', i: [1,2,3], j: 1, k: '101112', l: new Date() } const secondObject = { a: 1, b: '456', c: new Date() }
assigning 12 fields
const firstObject = { a: 1, b: '123', c: new Date(), d: 1, e: '456', f: new Date(), g: 1, h: '789', i: [1,2,3], j: 1, k: '101112', l: new Date() } const secondObject = { a: 1, b: '456', c: new Date(), d: 1, e: '456', f: new Date(), g: 1, h: '789', i: [1,2,3], j: 1, k: '101112', l: new Date() }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
assigning 3 fields
assigning 12 fields

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's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The test measures how the size of an object affects performance when assigning properties to it in JavaScript. Specifically, two cases are compared:

1. Assigning 3 fields: The first object `firstObject` has 12 properties (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l), while the second object `secondObject` also has 12 properties but with some differences.
2. Assigning 12 fields: A single object is created with all 12 properties.

**Options compared**

Two approaches are being compared:

1. **Small object (3-4 properties)**: The test case uses a small object with only a few properties, which might not be representative of real-world scenarios where objects have many more properties.
2. **Large object (12 properties)**: The test case uses an object with 12 properties, which is closer to the average size of objects in JavaScript.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

* Small object:
	+ Pros:
		- Easier to understand and analyze
		- May be more representative of small objects used in specific scenarios
	+ Cons:
		- Might not accurately represent real-world performance issues with large objects
		- Could lead to false positives or false negatives if the test is biased towards smaller objects
* Large object:
	+ Pros:
		- More representative of real-world scenarios where objects have many properties
		- May provide a more accurate picture of performance issues with large objects
	+ Cons:
		- Could be computationally expensive to execute
		- Might be less efficient due to the larger size of the object

**Library and its purpose**

In this benchmark, no specific JavaScript library is used. The test focuses on the JavaScript engine's performance.

**Special JS feature or syntax (none)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to create a similar benchmark, here are some alternatives:

1. Test different object sizes and property types (e.g., strings, numbers, booleans).
2. Compare performance with and without using libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js.
3. Investigate the impact of other factors on performance, such as array sizes, function calls, or string concatenation.

Keep in mind that the specifics will depend on your goals and requirements for the benchmark.

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/117.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/117.0.2045.60

Browser/OS: Chrome 117 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
assigning 3 fields	1360257.5 Ops/sec
assigning 12 fields	902021.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Does the size of the object being assigned affect performance? - updating case (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: assigning 3 fields vs assigning 12 fields

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

assigning 3 fields

assigning 12 fields

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):