Benchmark: object-hash vs JSON.stringify_harsh_gangar

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/hash-sum@2.0.0/hash-sum.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/object-hash@2.0.3/dist/object_hash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var v1 = {
    "id": "4dd64046-b51a-4b4f-9a07-ca9219aeaa97",
          "cardId": "a842c1f9-98a3-4bd7-ab22-4fd41d66d56d",
        "id": "c18df781-3005-4933-b724-d97ce7b20e5d",
        "name": "=",
        "displayName": "=",
        "linkageId": "9dc84729-12fd-4f31-a686-99abc5dd123b",
}


var v2 = {
    "id": "4dd64046-b51a-4b4f-9a07-ca9219aeaa97",
          "cardId": "a842c1f9-98a3-4bd7-ab22-4fd41d66d56d",
        "id": "c18df781-3005-4933-b724-d97ce7b20e5d",
        "name": "=",
        "displayName": "=",
        "linkageId": "9dc84729-12fd-4f31-a686-99abc5dd123b",
}

Tests:

JSON.stringify
JSON.stringify(v1) === JSON.stringify(v2)
object-hash
objectHash(v1) === objectHash(v2)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.stringify
object-hash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark definition consists of two test cases: `JSON.stringify` and `object-hash`. These tests compare the performance of two approaches for hashing objects.

**Test Case 1: JSON.stringify**

* **Description**: This test case compares the execution time of `JSON.stringify(v1)` and `JSON.stringify(v2)`, where `v1` and `v2` are two identical objects.
* **Purpose**: The purpose of this test is to measure the performance of `JSON.stringify()` in hashing objects. `JSON.stringify()` converts a JavaScript object into a JSON string, which can be hashed using various algorithms.
* **Pros**:
	+ Simple and widely supported implementation.
	+ Fast execution time due to its optimized algorithm.
* **Cons**:
	+ May not provide the most accurate or robust hash values, as it's designed for human-readable serialization rather than cryptographic hashing.
	+ May produce different results on different platforms or browsers due to differences in JSON string formatting.

**Test Case 2: object-hash**

* **Description**: This test case compares the execution time of `objectHash(v1)` and `objectHash(v2)`, where `v1` and `v2` are two identical objects.
* **Purpose**: The purpose of this test is to measure the performance of `objectHash()` in hashing objects. `objectHash()` is a custom implementation specifically designed for hashing JavaScript objects.
* **Pros**:
	+ Optimized for hashing objects, providing more accurate and robust hash values.
	+ May produce consistent results across platforms and browsers.
* **Cons**:
	+ Custom implementation may not be as widely supported or optimized as built-in functions like `JSON.stringify()`.
	+ Execution time may vary depending on the specific object structure and complexity.

**Library: Hash-sum**

The provided benchmark uses two libraries:

1. **Hash-sum**: A JavaScript library for hashing strings, used in conjunction with `JSON.stringify()` to compare its performance.
2. **object-hash**: A custom implementation specifically designed for hashing JavaScript objects.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no specific special features or syntaxes mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the use of JSON serialization and hashing implies familiarity with the standard JavaScript object notation and data structures.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to hashing objects include:

1. **Crypto libraries**: Utilizing cryptographic hash functions like SHA-256 or BLAKE2 for generating hashes.
2. **Hash function implementations**: Implementing custom hash functions, such as MurmurHash or Cityhash, which may offer better performance or accuracy for specific use cases.
3. **Object serialization**: Using alternative object serialization formats, like JSON-LD or MessagePack, which may provide more efficient or secure hashing options.

In summary, the benchmark definition provides a clear understanding of the test cases and their purposes, as well as the libraries used. By considering the pros and cons of each approach, developers can make informed decisions about which hashing method to use in their own projects.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON.stringify	1944260.0 Ops/sec
object-hash	14512.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

object-hash vs JSON.stringify_harsh_gangar (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JSON.stringify vs object-hash

Created: 7 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.stringify

object-hash

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):