Benchmark: member access vs with dirty check

Script Preparation code:

var thisO = {
  operatorsFilterOptions: {}
};
var getOperatorListForChildCondition = (childCondition) => {
  const schemaId = thisO.schema?.id ?? thisO.entitySchemaId ?? '';
  return thisO.operatorsFilterOptions?.[schemaId + childCondition.fieldName] ?? thisO.operatorsFilterOptions?.defaultOperatorFilters ?? thisO.operatorsFilterOptions;
}

var cCondition = {};
var withDirtyCheck = (childCondition) => {
  if(cCondition === childCondition) {
    return;
  }
  return getOperatorListForChildCondition(childCondition);
}

Tests:

with
withDirtyCheck({})
without
getOperatorListForChildCondition({})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
with
without

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
with	4071186.2 Ops/sec
without	5426691.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the provided benchmark and explore what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is represented by the JSON object:
```json
{
  "Name": "member access vs with dirty check",
  "Description": null,
  "Script Preparation Code": "...", // a JavaScript function `withDirtyCheck` and another function `getOperatorListForChildCondition`
  "Html Preparation Code": null
}
```
This benchmark is testing the performance difference between two approaches:

1. **Member access** (`getOperatorListForChildCondition`)
2. **With dirty check** (`withDirtyCheck`)

The script preparation code provides implementations for both functions.

**Option Comparison**

Here's a brief overview of each option:

### Member Access (`getOperatorListForChildCondition`)

* This approach uses direct member access to access the `operatorsFilterOptions` object.
* The function takes a `childCondition` parameter and returns a subset of the `operatorsFilterOptions` object based on the provided schema ID and child condition field name.

**Pros:**

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Easy to understand and maintain

**Cons:**

* May incur additional overhead due to repeated lookups or assignments within the `withDirtyCheck` function

### With Dirty Check (`withDirtyCheck`)

* This approach uses a cache-like mechanism, `cCondition`, to store previous values of `childCondition`.
* If the current value of `childCondition` matches the stored value, the function returns immediately without executing the more complex `getOperatorListForChildCondition` function.

**Pros:**

* Can reduce overhead by avoiding repeated lookups or assignments
* Caches results of expensive operations

**Cons:**

* Requires additional memory to store the cache (`cCondition`)
* May introduce additional complexity in implementation

**Other Considerations**

* Both approaches rely on the `operatorsFilterOptions` object being available and properly configured.
* The benchmark may not account for the actual usage patterns or variations in JavaScript engine optimizations, which could affect the performance of these functions.

**Library Usage**

There is no apparent library usage in this benchmark definition. However, it's possible that external libraries are used in the actual implementation or other test cases.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the provided code snippets use any special JavaScript features or syntax (e.g., async/await, generators, or arrow functions).

**Alternatives**

If you were to design a similar benchmark, you could consider the following alternatives:

* Use a more comprehensive testing framework that allows for additional test cases and scenarios.
* Include additional optimization techniques or caching mechanisms to further stress the performance differences between these two approaches.
* Experiment with different JavaScript engine versions or platforms to see how they affect performance.

Keep in mind that this is just a hypothetical suggestion, as the actual benchmark definition is fixed.

Related benchmarks:

member access vs with dirty check (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: with vs without

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

with

without

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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