Benchmark: JSON Stringify Speed Test May 19 0

Tests:

stringify 0
var span = {"name":"POST","spanId":"f71e5685ab25dae5","traceId":"3fdb4059f84547c1860685db61a7b018","startTimeUnixMilli":1715972353963,"attributes":{"protocol":"http:","port":"6000","host":"localhost:6000","pathname":"/resolve","pid":1744524,"http.response.status_code":200,"socket":0.6687429845333099,"lookup":0.9876289963722229,"connect":1.3284460008144379,"response":34.779782980680466,"end":35.001991987228394,"wait":0.6687429845333099,"dns":0.31888601183891296,"tcp":0.34081700444221497,"firstByte":33.45133697986603,"download":0.22220900654792786,"total":35.001991987228394},"kind":"client","parentSpanId":"3e46514651740f2a","endTimeUnixMilli":1715972354000,"status":{"code":1},"isWritten":false,"eventName":"endSpan"}; JSON.stringify(span);
stringify 1
var span = {"name":"POST","spanId":"f71e5685ab25dae5","traceId":"3fdb4059f84547c1860685db61a7b018","startTimeUnixMilli":1715972353963,"attributes":{"protocol":"http:","port":"6000","host":"localhost:6000","pathname":"/resolve","pid":1744524,"http.response.status_code":200,"socket":0.6687429845333099,"lookup":0.9876289963722229,"connect":1.3284460008144379,"response":34.779782980680466,"end":35.001991987228394,"wait":0.6687429845333099,"dns":0.31888601183891296,"tcp":0.34081700444221497,"firstByte":33.45133697986603,"download":0.22220900654792786,"total":35.001991987228394},"kind":"client","parentSpanId":"3e46514651740f2a","endTimeUnixMilli":1715972354000,"status":{"code":1},"isWritten":false,"eventName":"endSpan"}; JSON.stringify(span);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
stringify 0
stringify 1

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines two benchmark tests: "JSON Stringify Speed Test May 19 0". This benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript's `JSON.stringify()` method in creating a string representation of a given object.

**Test Cases**

There are only two test cases:

1. **Test Case 1: "stringify 0"**
	* The benchmark definition is the same as above, with one minor difference: the `endTimeUnixMilli` value is different.
2. **Test Case 2: "stringify 1"**
	* The benchmark definition is identical to Test Case 1.

**Comparison**

The two test cases are identical in terms of the input object (`span`) and the method being tested (`JSON.stringify()`). This means that only the execution time of `JSON.stringify()` will be compared between the two tests.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Single Test Case:** Using a single test case with the same input can lead to biased results, as it may not accurately represent real-world scenarios where different inputs might affect performance.
* **No Input Variation:** Since both test cases use the same input object, there's no variation in the data being processed. This might limit the benchmark's ability to capture performance variations due to differences in input sizes or complexities.

**Library and Syntax**

The `JSON.stringify()` method is a built-in JavaScript function that converts a JavaScript object into a JSON string. The `span` object appears to be a custom representation of a HTTP request span, likely used for tracing or logging purposes.

There are no special JS features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the use of `endTimeUnixMilli` and other properties might indicate that the benchmark is running on a server-side JavaScript environment, such as Node.js.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to create an alternative benchmark, you could consider:

* **Input Variation:** Use different input objects with varying sizes and complexities to capture performance variations.
* **Multiple Browsers/Environments:** Run tests on multiple browsers or environments (e.g., different operating systems) to ensure the results are representative of diverse scenarios.
* **Warm-up/Cool-down:** Include warm-up and cool-down periods in the benchmark to account for potential caching effects.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require modifying the benchmark definition and test cases to accommodate the changes.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 124 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
stringify 0	201980.1 Ops/sec
stringify 1	196643.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JSON Stringify Speed Test May 19 0 (version: 0)

JSON Stringify Speed Test May 19 0

Comparing performance of: stringify 0 vs stringify 1

Created: 6 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

stringify 0

stringify 1

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):