Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

perf: avoid re-calculating collection key length and use key.startsWith #576

Merged

Conversation

hurali97
Copy link
Contributor

@hurali97 hurali97 commented Aug 2, 2024

Details

This PR is part of performance improvements based on Expensify/App#45528. Based on the provided trace, we see that the isCollectionMemberKey takes around ~270ms as a whole. For a function, which is called repeatedly in a loop, this seems too much.

We couldn't reproduce the same behaviour as of the provided trace because we have accounts with less data, so we decided to benchmark the current implementation of isCollectionMemberKey and the improved implementation. In the latter, we propose to pass the collectionKey.length as a constant, which means do not re-calculate this in a loop. Which can happen when isCollectionMemberKey is called in a loop.

Let's take a look below at the results:

Screenshot 2024-08-05 at 7 33 38 PM

The improved case outperforms the baseline by being able to perform 4k more operations per second. The two cases are just the same with just one exception and that is in the improved one, we are not accessing the collectionKey.length each time.

The next improvement we propose is to avoid using Str.startsWith as it has additional checks using typeof operators. We can instead use key.startsWith(collectionKey) which is able to perform better on large data. See the benchmarks of above improvement combined against the baseline:

Screenshot 2024-08-06 at 1 08 50 PM

With both improvements combined, we get 8k more operations per second as compared to the baseline.

Related Issues

Expensify/App#45528

Automated Tests

Manual Tests

Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Related Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
android-web.mov
iOS: Native
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios-web.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.mov

@hurali97 hurali97 changed the title perf: use startsWith instead of Str.startsWith as it adds additional overhead on heavy accounts perf: avoid calculating collection key length and pass it as a const Aug 5, 2024
@hurali97 hurali97 changed the title perf: avoid calculating collection key length and pass it as a const perf: avoid re-calculating collection key length and pass it as a const Aug 5, 2024
@hurali97 hurali97 marked this pull request as ready for review August 5, 2024 14:36
@hurali97 hurali97 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 5, 2024 14:36
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from MariaHCD and removed request for a team August 5, 2024 14:36
@hurali97 hurali97 changed the title perf: avoid re-calculating collection key length and pass it as a const perf: avoid re-calculating collection key length and use key.startsWith Aug 6, 2024
@MariaHCD MariaHCD merged commit 9605e91 into Expensify:main Aug 7, 2024
5 checks passed
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 7, 2024

🚀Published to npm in v2.0.63

@adhorodyski adhorodyski deleted the perf/use-startswith-only branch August 29, 2024 13:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants