Benchmark: URLSearchParams vs JSON performance

Script Preparation code:

var data = {
  content: "This is an example of a message Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse leo tellus, scelerisque et varius sit amet, fermentum quis diam. In vehicula, tortor ut finibus aliquet, purus nisl tincidunt erat, ut faucibus mauris ligula id libero",
  author: "Alan",
  to: "Alice",
  type: "complex_message",
  location: "one two three four five"
};

var dataJson = JSON.stringify(data);

var dataUrl = new URLSearchParams(data).toString();

Tests:

JSON
var obj = JSON.parse(dataJson); var { content, author, to, type, location } = obj;
URLSearchParams
var searchParams = new URLSearchParams(dataUrl); var content = searchParams.get("content"); var author = searchParams.get("author"); var to = searchParams.get("to"); var type = searchParams.get("type"); var location = searchParams.get("location");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON
URLSearchParams

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and considered.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches for parsing and accessing data from a URL query string:

1. **JSON**: Using `JSON.parse()` to parse the JSON data string and then destructure it to extract individual values.
2. **URLSearchParams**: Creating a new instance of `URLSearchParams` with the URL query string and then using its `get()` method to access individual values.

**Comparison**

The benchmark is testing the performance difference between these two approaches on various browsers, devices, and operating systems. The test results show the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) for each approach.

**Pros and Cons**

**JSON Approach:**

Pros:

* Easier to read and understand, especially for developers familiar with JSON data formats.
* Can be used with other libraries or frameworks that support JSON parsing.

Cons:

* May require additional memory allocation for the `JSON.parse()` function.
* Performance can degrade if the input data is large.

**URLSearchParams Approach:**

Pros:

* Efficiently uses the browser's built-in URL parsing capabilities.
* Reduces memory allocation compared to using `JSON.parse()`.
* Can be more suitable for very large datasets or high-performance applications.

Cons:

* May require a larger amount of code and more complex setup.
* Less intuitive for developers unfamiliar with URL query strings.

**Library Considerations**

In the benchmark, the following library is used:

* **URLSearchParams**: A built-in JavaScript API for working with URL query strings. It's widely supported by modern browsers and provides an efficient way to access individual values from a query string.

Other alternatives could include using third-party libraries like jQuery or Moment.js, but they are not recommended due to performance and compatibility concerns.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require additional explanation. The focus is on the two approaches for parsing and accessing URL query string data.

**Other Alternatives**

For similar benchmarks, you might consider exploring other approaches, such as:

* Using `parseURL()` instead of `URLSearchParams`.
* Comparing performance with different data formats (e.g., CSV, TSV).
* Investigating the impact of caching or memoization on benchmark results.
* Evaluating performance on different platforms (e.g., desktop vs. mobile).

Keep in mind that the specific alternatives will depend on the goals and requirements of your benchmark.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; SAMSUNG SM-J810G) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) SamsungBrowser/16.0 Chrome/92.0.4515.166 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 92 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON	74126.3 Ops/sec
URLSearchParams	17334.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

URLSearchParams vs JSON performance (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: JSON vs URLSearchParams

Created: 3 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

JSON

URLSearchParams

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):