Benchmark: innerhtml vs removechild (table)1

HTML Preparation code:

<table><tbody id="container"></tbody></table>

Script Preparation code:

var node = document.getElementById('container');
const html = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 500; i++) html.push('<tr><td>aa</td><td>aa</td></tr>');
node.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeend', html.join(''));

Tests:

innerHTML
var node = document.getElementById('container'); node.innerHTML = '';
removeChild
var node = document.getElementById('container'); while(node.lastChild) node.removeChild(node.lastChild)
deleteRow
var tbody = document.getElementById('container'); var tbl = tbody.parentElement; var count = tbl.rows.length; for(var i = 1; i < count; i++){ tbl.deleteRow(i); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
innerHTML
removeChild
deleteRow

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition provided is for three individual test cases: `innerHTML`, `removeChild`, and `deleteRow`. These test cases are designed to measure the performance difference between using `innerHTML` versus removing child nodes from a table element in JavaScript.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is used to set up the test environment:
```javascript
var node = document.getElementById('container');
const html = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 500; i++) {
    html.push('<tr><td>aa</td><td>aa</td></tr>');
}
node.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeend', html.join(''));
```
This code creates a table element with an ID of "container" and populates it with 500 rows. The `insertAdjacentHTML` method is used to append the HTML string to the table body.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code is used to create the initial HTML structure:
```html
<table><tbody id="container"></tbody></table>
```
This code creates a simple table element with a `tbody` element that has an ID of "container".

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three individual test cases:

1. **innerHTML**
```javascript
var node = document.getElementById('container');
node.innerHTML = '';
```
This test case measures the performance of setting the `innerHTML` property to an empty string.

2. **removeChild**
```javascript
var node = document.getElementById('container');
while (node.lastChild) {
    node.removeChild(node.lastChild);
}
```
This test case measures the performance of removing child nodes from the table body using a while loop and the `removeChild` method.

3. **deleteRow**
```javascript
var tbody = document.getElementById('container');
var tbl = tbody.parentElement;
var count = tbl.rows.length;
for (var i = 1; i < count; i++) {
    tbl.deleteRow(i);
}
```
This test case measures the performance of deleting rows from the table body using a for loop and the `deleteRow` method.

**Pros and Cons**

* **innerHTML**: Fastest, but may be less efficient than other methods due to DOM manipulation. Pros: easy to use, good performance. Cons: may not work well with large datasets or complex HTML structures.
* **removeChild**: May be slower than `innerHTML`, but can be more efficient for large datasets. Pros: allows for manual node management, good performance for large datasets. Cons: requires more code and DOM manipulation.
* **deleteRow**: Slower than `innerHTML` and `removeChild`, but may be more suitable for certain use cases (e.g., table row manipulation). Pros: allows for more control over row deletion, can be faster for small datasets. Cons: slower performance, requires more code.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in the benchmark definition. However, some JavaScript engines or browsers may have built-in optimizations or features that affect the performance of these methods (e.g., Chrome's `innerHTML` optimization).

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark definition. The code only uses standard JavaScript syntax and DOM manipulation.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for achieving similar results include:

* Using a different data structure, such as an array of nodes, to reduce DOM manipulation.
* Using a library like jQuery or React that provides optimized DOM manipulation methods.
* Implementing custom optimization techniques, such as caching or precomputing values.
* Using a just-in-time (JIT) compiler or dynamic compilation to optimize the code for specific use cases.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity and trade-offs, and may not be suitable for all use cases.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/113.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/113.0.1774.57

Browser/OS: Chrome 113 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
innerHTML	260378.3 Ops/sec
removeChild	3210320.8 Ops/sec
deleteRow	2522108.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

innerhtml vs removechild (table)1 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: innerHTML vs removeChild vs deleteRow

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

innerHTML

removeChild

deleteRow

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):