url: improve performance of the format function #57099
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Review requested:
|
nodejs-github-bot
added
needs-ci
puskin
force-pushed
the
url-format-performance-improvements
branch
from
64039ec to
bdd5eb4
Compare
gurgunday
reviewed
Feb 16, 2025
lib/url.js
Outdated
|
|
||
| search = search.replaceAll('#', '%23'); | ||
| // Escape '#' in search. | ||
| if (search.indexOf('#') !== -1) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why didn't you use primordials here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe I'm missing something but in this file the usage of primordials seems inconsistent now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't use primordials because I forgot one spot :) changing it now!
I had the same doubt as you, the file is using very few primordials. I will create another PR to convert the whole file to be using them as much as possible
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah no problem I was just curious if there was a reason :)
gurgunday
reviewed
Feb 16, 2025
lib/url.js
Outdated
| search = search.replaceAll('#', '%23'); | ||
| // Escape '#' in search. | ||
| if (search.indexOf('#') !== -1) { | ||
| search = search.replace(/#/g, '%23'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess this got slower when # exists, but looks like an ok compromise
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| search = search.replace(/#/g, '%23'); | |
| search = search.replaceAll('#', '%23'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
By the way this is because replaceAll has similar or better performance than a global static regexp, because it doesn't need to be compiled
To lower regexp usage I had made a PR replacing all these a while ago, so I think you can safely replace with replaceAll
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fascinating, it makes sense :) updated it with StringPrototypeReplaceAll
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #57099 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 89.09% 89.09%
=======================================
Files 665 665
Lines 193249 193252 +3
Branches 37231 37222 -9
=======================================
+ Hits 172175 172184 +9
+ Misses 13802 13799 -3
+ Partials 7272 7269 -3
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
targos
added
benchmark
puskin
force-pushed
the
url-format-performance-improvements
branch
from
bdd5eb4 to
247e1a2
Compare
puskin
force-pushed
the
url-format-performance-improvements
branch
from
247e1a2 to
1173315
Compare
|
@nodejs/performance can someone start a url benchmark ci? |
|
https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1657/
|
|
anonrig
approved these changes
Feb 17, 2025
jasnell
approved these changes
Feb 18, 2025
atlowChemi
approved these changes
Feb 19, 2025
|
antything else needed here? |
|
can I please ask for a rerun of the CI? |
gurgunday
added
the
author ready
github-actions
bot
removed
the
request-ci
RafaelGSS
approved these changes
May 1, 2025
BridgeAR
approved these changes
May 3, 2025
BridgeAR
added
the
commit-queue
nodejs-github-bot
removed
the
commit-queue
|
Landed in 723d7bb |
targos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 16, 2025
PR-URL: #57099 Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
aduh95
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2025
PR-URL: #57099 Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
11 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As part of my ongoing review of the
assertcodebase, I started examining thelib/url.jsfile and optimizing some straightforward code that could be further refined for better performance.Here are the benchmark results for the
benchmarks/url/url-format.jsfile:For type="slashes":
123% improvement
For type="file":
50% improvement