Benchmark: Set vs Object vs Map, Access (mutable, growing)

Script Preparation code:

var set = new Set(["one", "two", "three", "four", "five", "six", "seven", "eight", "nine", "ten"]);
var object = {"one": true, "two": true, "three": true, "four": true, "five": true, "six": true, "seven": true, "eight": true, "nine": true, "ten": true};
var map = new Map([["one", true], ["two", true], ["three", true], ["four", true], ["five", true], ["six", true], ["seven", true], ["eight", true], ["nine", true], ["ten", true]]);

var values = Object.keys(object);

Tests:

Set
window.last ??= performance.now(); set.delete(window.last); set.has(performance.now()); set.add(performance.now()); set.has('one'); set.has('two'); set.has('three'); set.has('four'); set.has('five'); set.delete(performance.now()); set.has(performance.now()); set.add(performance.now()); set.has('six'); set.has('seven'); set.has('eight'); set.has('nine'); set.has('ten'); set.delete(performance.now()); window.last = performance.now(); set.has(window.last); set.add(window.last);
Object
window.last ??= performance.now(); delete object[window.last]; object[performance.now()]; object[performance.now()] = true; object['one']; object['two']; object['three']; object['four']; object['five']; object[performance.now()]; object[performance.now()] = true; object['six']; object['seven']; object['eight']; object['nine']; object['ten']; window.last = performance.now(); object[window.last]; object[window.last] = true
Map
window.last ??= performance.now(); map.delete(window.last); map.get(performance.now()); map.set(performance.now(), true); map.get('one'); map.get('two'); map.get('three'); map.get('four'); map.get('five'); map.get(performance.now()); map.set(performance.now(), true); map.get('six'); map.get('seven'); map.get('eight'); map.get('nine'); map.get('ten'); window.last = performance.now(); map.get(window.last); map.set(window.last, true);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
Object
Map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Set	401823.6 Ops/sec
Object	776693.9 Ops/sec
Map	789778.6 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares the speed of accessing values from three data structures: Sets, Objects, and Maps. The goal is to determine which data structure is the fastest for boolean referencing, i.e., checking if a value exists or adding/removing a value.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

1. **Sets**: JavaScript's built-in `Set` object, which stores unique values in an unordered collection.
2. **Objects**: A plain JavaScript Object, where each property is a key-value pair.
3. **Maps**: JavaScript's built-in `Map` object, which stores key-value pairs with optional values.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Sets**:
	+ Pros: Fast lookup and insertion times due to its hash table implementation.
	+ Cons: May require more memory if the set grows large, as it needs to store additional metadata (e.g., size, capacity).
* **Objects**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight, easy to create, and fast for simple lookups using property access (e.g., `obj['key']`).
	+ Cons: Slow for large datasets or complex queries due to the overhead of iterating over properties.
* **Maps**:
	+ Pros: Fast lookup and insertion times, similar to Sets, with additional features like optional values and key-value pairs.
	+ Cons: May require more memory than Sets if the map grows large, as it needs to store additional metadata (e.g., size, capacity).

**Library Usage**

None of the benchmark tests use external libraries. They rely on built-in JavaScript data structures.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

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

**Other Considerations**

When choosing a data structure for boolean referencing, consider factors like:

* Speed: If speed is critical, Sets and Maps might be better choices.
* Memory usage: If memory efficiency is important, Sets might be a better option due to their more compact representation.
* Complexity: For simple lookups, Objects might be sufficient. For more complex queries or large datasets, Sets or Maps might be more suitable.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative data structures in JavaScript, consider:

1. **WeakSets**: Similar to Sets but with additional features like automatic garbage collection and support for weak references.
2. **WeakMaps**: Similar to Maps but with additional features like automatic garbage collection and support for weak references.
3. **JSON objects**: While not optimized for performance, JSON objects can be used as a lightweight alternative to Sets or Objects.

Keep in mind that the choice of data structure ultimately depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Set vs Object vs Map, Access (mutable, growing) (version: 0)

Compare the speed to retrieve a value from three data structures that can be used for boolean referencing; i.e. for mapping enabled settings.

Comparing performance of: Set vs Object vs Map

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

Object

Map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):