Benchmark: gtestgfhfghfgh - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const PreparedStmts = Object.freeze({
  GET: {
    Todo: 'SELECT ID,Text,1000*DateSet as DateSet,DDdate FROM Todo WHERE UserID = $UserID and TimeTaken = 0',
    Habit: 'SELECT ID,Text,DateLastDone,Frequency,Streak FROM Habit WHERE UserID = $UserID and Frequency>0'
  },
  POST: {
    Todo: 'INSERT INTO Todo (UserID, Text, DateSet, DDdate) VALUES ($UserID, $Text, strftime("%s","now"), CAST($DDdate AS INTEGER))',
    Habit: 'INSERT INTO Habit (UserID, DateLastDone, Text, Frequency) VALUES ($UserID, strftime("%Y-%m-%d","now"), $Text, $Frequency)'
  },
  PUT: {
    Todo: 'UPDATE Todo SET Text=$Text, DDdate=CAST($DDdate AS INTEGER) WHERE ID=$ID',
    Habit: 'UPDATE Habit SET Text=$Text, Frequency=$Frequency,Streak=$Streak WHERE ID=$ID'
  },
 DELETE: {
    Todo: 'UPDATE Todo SET TimeTaken=CAST($TimeTaken AS INTEGER)/1000 WHERE ID=$ID',
    Habit: 'UPDATE Habit SET Frequency=-1 WHERE ID=$ID'
  }
});

function getSQLrequirements() {
  let allRequirements ={};
  for (let lvl1 in PreparedStmts){
  	allRequirements[lvl1]={};
  	for (let lvl2 in PreparedStmts[lvl1]) {
      allRequirements[lvl1][lvl2]= PreparedStmts[lvl1][lvl2].match(/\$\w+/g);
  	}
  }
  console.log(allRequirements);
  return allRequirements;
}

Tests:

fgfrtg
getSQLrequirements()
rfsdgdg
console.log(1)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
fgfrtg
rfsdgdg

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the JavaScript microbenchmark that is being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is provided as a JSON object, which includes:

* `Name`: a unique name for the benchmark
* `Description`: a brief description of the benchmark (in this case, just some random characters)
* `Script Preparation Code`: a JavaScript function that prepares the test script. This function defines an object called `PreparedStmts` that contains SQL query templates with placeholders for variables.
* `Html Preparation Code`: an empty string, indicating that no HTML preparation code is required.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark has two individual test cases:

1. The first test case runs the `getSQLrequirements()` function, which extracts all SQL requirements from the `PreparedStmts` object and logs them to the console.
2. The second test case simply runs the `console.log(1)` statement.

**What is being tested**

The benchmark appears to be testing the performance of JavaScript execution on different browsers and devices. Specifically:

* It tests how long it takes to run each test case, as measured by the number of executions per second.
* It also collects information about the browser, device platform, operating system, and raw UA string (user agent string).

**Options compared**

The benchmark is comparing two different approaches for measuring performance:

1. **Direct execution**: Running the `getSQLrequirements()` function directly, which involves parsing and executing the SQL queries.
2. **Indirect execution**: Running the `console.log(1)` statement, which involves only a simple arithmetic operation.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

* Direct execution:
	+ Pros: Provides more detailed information about performance (e.g., parse time, execute time).
	+ Cons: Requires parsing and executing SQL queries, which can be complex and slow.
* Indirect execution:
	+ Pros: Simplifies the test case and reduces overhead.
	+ Cons: May not provide accurate or meaningful performance metrics.

**Libraries used**

None. The benchmark does not use any external libraries or frameworks.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to run similar benchmarks on MeasureThat.net, here are some alternative test cases:

* Test the performance of different browser engines (e.g., Blink vs. Gecko).
* Compare the performance of different device platforms (e.g., Windows vs. macOS).
* Run more complex test cases that involve multiple iterations or conditional statements.

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

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.98 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 71 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
fgfrtg	80806.0 Ops/sec
rfsdgdg	170409.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

gtestgfhfghfgh (version: 0)

gfh

Comparing performance of: fgfrtg vs rfsdgdg

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

fgfrtg

rfsdgdg

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):