Benchmark: Map vs Object new

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [{
        code: "a",
        status: "1"
    },
    {
        code: "b",
        status: "2"
    },
    {
        code: "c",
        status: "3"
    },
    {
        code: "d",
        status: "4"
    },
    {
        code: "e",
        status: "5"
    },
    {
        code: "f",
        status: "6"
    },
    {
        code: "g",
        status: "7"
    },
    {
        code: "h",
        status: "8"
    }
]

var arrForMap = [
    ["a", "1"],
    ["b", "2"],
    ["c", "3"],
    ["d", "4"],
    ["e", "5"],
    ["f", "6"],
    ["g", "7"],
    ["h", "8"],
]

Tests:

GetFromArray
for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { a = arr.find((e) => e.code === "h").status; }
GetFromMap
const newMap = new Map(arrForMap); for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { a = newMap.get("h"); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
GetFromArray
GetFromMap

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:106.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/106.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 106 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
GetFromArray	906.1 Ops/sec
GetFromMap	2454.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to retrieve data from arrays and maps in JavaScript:

1. `for` loop with `arr.find()`
2. Creating a new map from an array and using it with `newMap.get()`

**Options Comparison**

Two options are compared:

A) Using `arr.find()` with a callback function to search for an element in the array.

B) Creating a new map from an array of key-value pairs using `Array.prototype.map()` and then using `map.get()` to retrieve values from the map.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

### A) `for` loop with `arr.find()`

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation.
* No additional memory allocation or data structure creation required.

Cons:

* Iterates over the entire array, which can be slow for large datasets.
* Returns an iterator object that must be traversed to get the result.

### B) Creating a new map from an array and using `newMap.get()`

Pros:

* Can take advantage of JavaScript's built-in hash table data structure (maps), which provides faster lookup times.
* Reduces iteration over the entire dataset, making it more suitable for large datasets.

Cons:

* Requires additional memory allocation to create a new map object.
* May incur overhead due to the creation and garbage collection of the map object.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, `Array.prototype.map()` is used to convert an array to a map, which is a built-in JavaScript feature.

**Other Considerations**

When working with large datasets or performance-critical applications, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* Memory allocation and garbage collection
* Data structure choice (e.g., arrays vs. maps)
* Iteration algorithms and their efficiency

**Alternatives**

Other approaches to retrieve data from arrays and maps include:

A) Using `Array.prototype.indexOf()` or `indexOf()` method, which returns the index of the first occurrence of a specified element.
B) Implementing custom search algorithms using bitwise operations or other techniques.
C) Utilizing specialized libraries or frameworks that provide optimized data retrieval mechanisms.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have varying trade-offs in terms of performance, memory usage, and implementation complexity.

Related benchmarks:

Map vs Object new (version: 0)

my own

Comparing performance of: GetFromArray vs GetFromMap

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

GetFromArray

GetFromMap

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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