Hacktoberfest 2026:维护者为十月标记出来的 issue,仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

Some benchmarks are measured with wrong approach

未关闭
#96 17 条评论 9 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
4/5
预计耗时
3-5 天
新手友好度
38/100
Issue 类型
缺陷
描述清晰度
基本清楚
活跃度
停滞
技术栈
ruby
领域
performance

调研方向

从 code/array/length-vs-size-vs-count.rb 开始,这是 issue 中明确链接的 benchmark,并检查其 Benchmark.ips 报告块。将当前基于块的方法与这里描述的 benchmark-ips 字符串报告形式进行比较。当受影响的小操作 benchmark 使用开销更低的方法并且其结果已更新时,即视为完成;issue 没有列出所有受影响的文件。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

General

tl;dr When we measure small things we have to remove all overheads which have impact. Wrapping with a method and block call is quite big overhead for most of benchmarks in this repository.

Suppose you want compare performance of "2 + 3" vs "2 * 3" calls. If you do it with a approach used in this repository you will get this results:

require "benchmark/ips"

def slow
  2 * 2
end

def fast
  2 + 2
end

Benchmark.ips do |x|
  x.report("2 * 2") { slow }
  x.report("2 + 2") { fast }
  x.compare!
end

(simplified output)

Comparison:
               2 + 2:  8304760.0 i/s
               2 * 2:  7535516.6 i/s - 1.10x slower

But there is one problem. Calling a method + surrounding block ({ slow }) has bigger overhead than calling Fixnum#+ or Fixnum#* itself. Thea easiest way to observe it is to repeat benchmarked operations in one call. Like this:

require "benchmark/ips"

def slow
  2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2; 2*2;
end

def fast
  2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2; 2+2;
end

Benchmark.ips do |x|
  x.report("2 * 2") { slow }
  x.report("2 + 2") { fast }
  x.compare!
end
Comparison:
               2 + 2:  4680545.3 i/s
               2 * 2:  3468681.3 i/s - 1.35x slower

See how results changed? Writing our benchmarks in this way would be quite problematic. Fortunately benchmark-ips gem has answer for that. Benchmark::IPS::Job#report method allows to pass string which will be compiled before benchmark is run. Passing right string allows to measure it properly:

require "benchmark/ips"

Benchmark.ips do |x|
  x.report("2 * 2", "2 * 2;" * 1_000)
  x.report("2 + 2", "2 + 2;" * 1_000)
  x.compare!
end
Comparison:
               2 + 2:    91567.5 i/s
               2 * 2:    57994.4 i/s - 1.58x slower

This is greatly explained here: https://docs.omniref.com/ruby/2.2.1/symbols/Benchmark/bm#annotation=4095926&line=182

How does this affect fast-ruby benchmarks? All benchmarks that call small things are flawed. One of them is Array#length vs Array#size vs Array#count benchmark. Here is the original code and result obtained on my computer:

require 'benchmark/ips'

ARRAY = [*1..100]

Benchmark.ips do |x|
  x.report("Array#length") { ARRAY.length }
  x.report("Array#size") { ARRAY.size }
  x.report("Array#count") { ARRAY.count }
  x.compare!
end
Comparison:
          Array#size:  8679483.2 i/s
        Array#length:  8664450.7 i/s - 1.00x slower
         Array#count:  7237299.5 i/s - 1.20x slower

The same benchmark measure with described approach gives different numbers:

require 'benchmark/ips'

ARRAY = [*1..100]

Benchmark.ips do |x|
  x.report("Array#length", "ARRAY.length;" * 1_000)
  x.report("Array#size",   "ARRAY.size;"   * 1_000)
  x.report("Array#count",  "ARRAY.count;"  * 1_000)
  x.compare!
end
Comparison:
          Array#size:   113902.4 i/s
        Array#length:   113655.9 i/s - 1.00x slower
         Array#count:    28753.4 i/s - 3.96x slower

Difference: 1.20x slower vs 3.96x slower.

My guess is that it affects most of benchmarks.

主要语言
Ruby
星标
5.7k
派生
370
PR 合并指标
30 天内没有已合并 PR

贡献指南

打开贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

fastruby/fast-ruby 的其他 Issue

查看 fastruby/fast-ruby 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Ruby Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。