Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
splitted vs whole in large object
(version: 3)
Comparing performance of:
splitted-and-assign vs whole
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const cut = 3, each = 600000 const lists = new Array(cut) .fill(0) .map((_, k) => k) .map((v) => new Array(each).fill(v).map((_, k) => v * each + k)); var objList = lists.map((v) => v.reduce((accu, curr) => { accu[curr] = { addr: curr.toString(), size: 188888, vmT: 1, cls: "cls name", nodeT: 2, pNode: ["1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5"], // addr cNode: ["1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5"], // addr edge: { 1: { refT: 1, off: "string", name: "string", }, 2: { refT: 1, off: "string", name: "string", } }, }; return accu; }, {}) ); var objStrList = objList.map(v => JSON.stringify(v)); var wholeObj = Object.assign(...objList); var wholeObjStr = JSON.stringify(wholeObj)
Tests:
splitted-and-assign
const parsedObjList = objStrList.map((v) => JSON.parse(v)); const wholeObj = Object.assign(...parsedObjList);
whole
const parsedWholeObj = JSON.parse(wholeObjStr);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
splitted-and-assign
whole
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Benchmark Explanation** The provided benchmark measures the performance of two approaches to process large objects in JavaScript: 1. **Whole Object Approach**: This approach involves parsing and assigning the entire object at once, using `Object.assign()` and `JSON.parse()`. 2. **Splitted Object Approach**: This approach involves splitting the object into smaller parts (arrays), processing each part individually, and then reassembling the object. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches on large objects. The options being compared are: * Whole Object Approach: `Object.assign()` and `JSON.parse()` * Splitted Object Approach: splitting the object into smaller parts (arrays), processing each part individually, and reassembling the object **Pros and Cons** **Whole Object Approach** Pros: * Easier to implement and understand * Less memory allocation and garbage collection overhead Cons: * May be slower due to the need to parse and assign the entire object at once * Can lead to performance issues if the object is too large **Splitted Object Approach** Pros: * Can be faster for very large objects, as it processes each part individually * Reduces memory allocation and garbage collection overhead Cons: * More complex implementation and understanding required * Requires careful handling of array indices and bounds checking **Other Considerations** * The benchmark uses a fixed-size object (600,000 elements) to test the performance of both approaches. * The `JSON.stringify()` function is used to convert the entire object into a string, which may introduce additional overhead. * The `Object.assign()` method is used to reassemble the object from its constituent parts. **Library and Special JS Features** The benchmark uses: * No external libraries (other than JavaScript built-in functions) * No special JavaScript features or syntax **Alternative Approaches** Other approaches that could be considered include: * Using a more efficient data structure, such as a trie or suffix tree * Implementing the splitting and reassembling logic using specialized algorithms or techniques * Optimizing the parsing and assignment steps using specialized libraries or tools
Related benchmarks:
Lodash Chunk vs Native Reduce v2
Lodash Chunk vs Native Reduce v3
boolean chunks for vs reduce
Chunk array from vs reduce vs for
slice version 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?