Benchmark: 2-tier vs 3-tier Object.assign vs 3-tier spread vs 3-tier constructor

2-tier vs 3-tier Object.assign vs 3-tier spread vs 3-tier constructor (version: 0)

This demonstrates the difference in performance between 2-tier architectures, which simply return database objects through controllers from the repositories vs 3-tier architectures which run some sort of service layer mapping to obfuscate unnecessary db information from both the controller layer and, subsequently, the front-end. Such mapping logic will ideally use Object.assign, the spread operator, or perhaps an explicit constructor mapping.

Comparing performance of: 2-tier vs 3-tier Object.assign vs 3-tier spread vs 3-tier constructor

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Tests:

2-tier
var dbData = { databaseIdName: "5d493b95-6255-4662-8de5-875370997a7c", a: 1, b:"hello", c: true, d:7, e: "test", f: "getting", g: "longer", h: false, i: "but more realistic for enterprise development" }; return dbData;
3-tier Object.assign
var dbData = { databaseIdName: "5d493b95-6255-4662-8de5-875370997a7c", a: 1, b:"hello", c: true, d:7, e: "test", f: "getting", g: "longer", h: false, i: "but more realistic for enterprise development" }; var appData = Object.assign({ id: dbData.databaseIdName }, dbData); delete appData.databaseIdName; return appData;
3-tier spread
var dbData = { databaseIdName: "5d493b95-6255-4662-8de5-875370997a7c", a: 1, b:"hello", c: true, d:7, e: "test", f: "getting", g: "longer", h: false, i: "but more realistic for enterprise development" }; var { databaseIdName, ...appData } = dbData; appData.id = databaseIdName; return appData;
3-tier constructor
var dbData = { databaseIdName: "5d493b95-6255-4662-8de5-875370997a7c", a: 1, b:"hello", c: true, d:7, e: "test", f: "getting", g: "longer", h: false, i: "but more realistic for enterprise development" }; class AppData { constructor(databaseIdName, a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i){ this.id = databaseIdName; this.serviceA = a; this.serviceB = b; this.serviceC = c; this.serviceD = d; this.serviceE = e; this.serviceF = f; this.serviceG = g; this.serviceH = h; this.serviceI = i; } } var appData = new AppData( dbData.databaseIdName, dbData.a, dbData.b, dbData.c, dbData.d, dbData.e, dbData.f, dbData.g, dbData.h, dbData.i ) return appData;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
2-tier
3-tier Object.assign
3-tier spread
3-tier constructor

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 23 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is comparing three different approaches to mapping database data to application data in a 2-tier architecture vs a 3-tier architecture. The two architectures are:

1. **2-tier**: In this approach, the controller layer simply returns the database object through the repository.
2. **3-tier Object.assign**: In this approach, an intermediate service layer is used to map unnecessary database information from the repository to the application data using `Object.assign`.
3. **3-tier spread**: In this approach, an intermediate service layer is used to map unnecessary database information from the repository to the application data using destructuring assignment (the spread operator).
4. **3-tier constructor**: In this approach, an explicit class constructor is used to create a new object with mapped database information.

**Options being compared:**

The benchmark is comparing four different approaches:

1. **2-tier** (no intermediate layer)
2. **3-tier Object.assign** (uses `Object.assign` to map data)
3. **3-tier spread** (uses destructuring assignment to map data)
4. **3-tier constructor** (uses an explicit class constructor to create a new object)

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **2-tier**: Pros - simple, lightweight; Cons - may not be efficient if database data is large or complex.
2. **3-tier Object.assign**: Pros - easy to implement; Cons - may involve unnecessary copying of data using `Object.assign`.
3. **3-tier spread**: Pros - concise and readable; Cons - requires modern JavaScript features (destructuring assignment).
4. **3-tier constructor**: Pros - flexible and customizable; Cons - may require more code than other approaches.

**Library:**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark, but the `Object.assign` method is a built-in part of the JavaScript language.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The `3-tier spread` approach uses the modern JavaScript feature of destructuring assignment (the spread operator). This allows for concise and expressive way to extract data from objects into separate variables. However, if you're targeting an older browser that doesn't support this feature, you may need to use a different approach.

**Alternatives:**

If you don't like using `Object.assign`, you can consider other approaches such as:

* Using the `lodash` library's `pick` function
* Implementing your own custom mapping function
* Using an explicit loop to map data

However, these alternatives may require more code and may not be as concise or readable as the `3-tier spread` approach.

Overall, this benchmark provides a good comparison of four different approaches to mapping database data to application data in a 2-tier architecture vs a 3-tier architecture.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/68.0.3440.106 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 68 on Mac OS X 10.13.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
2-tier	663661568.0 Ops/sec
3-tier Object.assign	555777.8 Ops/sec
3-tier spread	432168.4 Ops/sec
3-tier constructor	46808.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

2-tier vs 3-tier Object.assign vs 3-tier spread vs 3-tier constructor (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 2-tier vs 3-tier Object.assign vs 3-tier spread vs 3-tier constructor

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

2-tier

3-tier Object.assign

3-tier spread

3-tier constructor

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 23 days ago):