Benchmark: repository - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const createItem = (value, index) => ({ id: index, label: "Label" });
const payload = new Array(3).map(createItem);
var action = { payload };

var emptyValues = (source) => {
    const copy = {};
    // create an object with the same properties but empty values
    Object.keys(source).forEach((key) => copy[key] = typeof source[key] === "string" ? "" : null);
    return copy;
};

var extractAttributes = (payload) => payload.attributes;

​x
 
const createItem = (value, index) => ({ id: index, label: "Label" });const payload = new Array(3).map(createItem);var action = { payload };​var emptyValues = (source) => {    const copy = {};    // create an object with the same properties but empty values    Object.keys(source).forEach((key) => copy[key] = typeof source[key] === "string" ? "" : null);    return copy;};​var extractAttributes = (payload) => payload.attributes;

Tests:

using extra data constant

const repository = (payload) => {
    const data = payload.map(extractAttributes);
    return [
        ...data.slice(0, 1).map(emptyValues),
        ...data
    ];
}

repository(action.payload);

 
const repository = (payload) => {    const data = payload.map(extractAttributes);    return [        ...data.slice(0, 1).map(emptyValues),        ...data    ];}​repository(action.payload);

without extra constant

const repository2 = (payload) => {
    return [
        ...payload.slice(0, 1).map(extractAttributes).map(emptyValues),
        ...payload.map(extractAttributes)
    ];
}

repository2(action.payload);

 
const repository2 = (payload) => {    return [        ...payload.slice(0, 1).map(extractAttributes).map(emptyValues),        ...payload.map(extractAttributes)    ];}​repository2(action.payload);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
using extra data constant
without extra constant

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.101 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 53 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
using extra data constant	506654.8 Ops/sec
without extra constant	446609.3 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

Measuring that.net is a website where users can create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks to compare the performance of different approaches.

Benchmark Definition

The benchmark definition in JSON format represents two test cases:

"using extra data constant"
"without extra constant"

Both test cases use the same JavaScript function repository with slightly different implementations.

Script Preparation Code

The script preparation code defines two functions:

createItem: creates an object with a fixed structure (id and label) for each item in the payload array.
payload: creates an array of three items using the createItem function.
action: creates an object with the payload as its property.
emptyValues: creates a copy of an object with empty values for non-string properties.
extractAttributes: extracts attributes from an object.

Html Preparation Code

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that this benchmark does not rely on any specific HTML structure or rendering.

Test Cases

The two test cases differ in the implementation of the repository function:

"using extra data constant":
- The function takes the payload as an argument.
- It extracts attributes from each item using extractAttributes.
- It creates a copy of the first item with empty values using emptyValues.
- It concatenates the result with the remaining items in the payload.
"without extra constant":
- The function does not take any arguments.
- It extracts attributes from each item using extractAttributes directly on the payload.
- It concatenates the result without creating a copy of the first item.

Pros and Cons

"using extra data constant":
- Pros: This implementation can be more efficient if the first item needs to be processed separately, but still benefits from caching the extracted attributes.
- Cons: This approach may lead to unnecessary computations if the first item is not significant.
"without extra constant":
- Pros: This implementation avoids unnecessary computations for the first item and leverages caching.
- Cons: If the first item needs special processing, this approach will incur additional overhead.

Library

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases.

Special JS Feature

The benchmark uses the ... operator (spread operator) to concatenate arrays. This feature was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

Alternatives

Other alternatives for benchmarking similar scenarios might include:

Using a different data structure, such as a linked list or a tree, instead of an array.
Implementing the repository function using a different programming paradigm, such as imperative vs. functional programming.
Adding additional computations or transformations to the payload before passing it to the repository function.

In general, benchmarking involves identifying and optimizing performance-critical sections of code that can have a significant impact on system performance. Measuring that.net provides a simple and accessible platform for developers to test their ideas and compare different approaches.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring that.net is a website where users can create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks to compare the performance of different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition in JSON format represents two test cases:

1. "using extra data constant"
2. "without extra constant"

Both test cases use the same JavaScript function `repository` with slightly different implementations.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines two functions:

* `createItem`: creates an object with a fixed structure (id and label) for each item in the payload array.
* `payload`: creates an array of three items using the `createItem` function.
* `action`: creates an object with the payload as its property.
* `emptyValues`: creates a copy of an object with empty values for non-string properties.
* `extractAttributes`: extracts attributes from an object.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that this benchmark does not rely on any specific HTML structure or rendering.

**Test Cases**

The two test cases differ in the implementation of the `repository` function:

1. "using extra data constant":
	* The function takes the payload as an argument.
	* It extracts attributes from each item using `extractAttributes`.
	* It creates a copy of the first item with empty values using `emptyValues`.
	* It concatenates the result with the remaining items in the payload.
2. "without extra constant":
	* The function does not take any arguments.
	* It extracts attributes from each item using `extractAttributes` directly on the payload.
	* It concatenates the result without creating a copy of the first item.

**Pros and Cons**

1. "using extra data constant":
	+ Pros: This implementation can be more efficient if the first item needs to be processed separately, but still benefits from caching the extracted attributes.
	+ Cons: This approach may lead to unnecessary computations if the first item is not significant.
2. "without extra constant":
	+ Pros: This implementation avoids unnecessary computations for the first item and leverages caching.
	+ Cons: If the first item needs special processing, this approach will incur additional overhead.

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases.

**Special JS Feature**

The benchmark uses the `...` operator (spread operator) to concatenate arrays. This feature was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for benchmarking similar scenarios might include:

* Using a different data structure, such as a linked list or a tree, instead of an array.
* Implementing the `repository` function using a different programming paradigm, such as imperative vs. functional programming.
* Adding additional computations or transformations to the payload before passing it to the `repository` function.

Related benchmarks:

repository (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: using extra data constant vs without extra constant

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result