Skip to content

benchmark: add benchmark utility for Error instance #61180

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
mertcanaltin wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

benchmark: add benchmark utility for Error instance #61180

Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3b40faf
benchmark: add benchmark utility for isNativeError function
mertcanaltin Dec 27, 2025
5fcf423
repair benchmark
mertcanaltin Dec 27, 2025
9de3f6f
refine test arguments and measure elapsed time in isNativeError bench…
mertcanaltin Dec 28, 2025
c4aaa5d
simplify isNativeError test arguments and remove performance logging
mertcanaltin Dec 28, 2025
23955ed
store result of isNativeError function for validation
mertcanaltin Dec 30, 2025
f2e53f1
add benchmark utility for isError function
mertcanaltin Dec 30, 2025
6b26012
refactor benchmark utility for isError function to improve readability
mertcanaltin Dec 30, 2025
8c79e29
add benchmark utility for isNativeError function
mertcanaltin Dec 30, 2025
a0f0062
Merge branch 'main' into mert/create/benchmark/isNativeError
mertcanaltin Jan 3, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
39 changes: 39 additions & 0 deletions benchmark/util/is-native-error.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
'use strict';

const common = require('../common');

const args = {
true: new Error('test'),
falsePrimitive: 42,
falseObject: { foo: 'bar' },
};

const bench = common.createBenchmark(
main,
{
argument: ['true', 'falsePrimitive', 'falseObject'],
version: ['native', 'js'],
n: [1e6],
},
{
flags: ['--expose-internals', '--no-warnings'],
},
);

function main({ argument, version, n }) {
const util = common.binding('util');
const types = require('internal/util/types');

const func = { native: util, js: types }[version].isNativeError;
Copy link
Member

@RafaelGSS RafaelGSS Dec 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't recently deprecated?

node/doc/api/deprecations.md

Line 4283 in 20bf328

### DEP0197: `util.types.isNativeError()`

Copy link
Member Author

@mertcanaltin mertcanaltin Dec 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it is deprecated but still supported - we should still not regress on stable releases and this change ensures that @RafaelGSS

Copy link
Member

@RafaelGSS RafaelGSS Dec 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But, what's the point of this benchmark? I mean, if we see util/isNativeError is slower, what it means afterall? Which API will be directly impacted besides the deprecated API?

Copy link
Member Author

@mertcanaltin mertcanaltin Dec 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This comparison ensures that existing users will not experience performance drops or unexpected slowdowns until the API is completely removed. It also aims to provide a reference for future changes or alternatives.


const testArgs = [args[argument], args[argument], args[argument]];
Copy link
Member

@lpinca lpinca Dec 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any reason for this? If I'm reading correctly, the elements are all equals.

Copy link
Member Author

@mertcanaltin mertcanaltin Dec 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wanted to provide more arguments.

Copy link
Member

@lpinca lpinca Dec 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With

const testArg = testArgs[iteration % 3];
func(testArg)

below, I'm still not sure I understand.

Copy link
Member Author

@mertcanaltin mertcanaltin Dec 28, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're right, it could be misleading for them all to be the same I changed them with different arguments.
9de3f6f

now "%3" alternative I use testArgs.length

Copy link
Member Author

@mertcanaltin mertcanaltin Dec 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

After the latest changes, I got a test failure because the benchmark was running with three configurations instead of the expected one or two. I’ve updated the code so each run uses only a single argument, matching the test infrastructure’s requirements. FYİ @RafaelGSS

let sum = 0;

bench.start();
for (let iteration = 0; iteration < n; iteration++) {
const testArg = testArgs[iteration % 3];
sum += func(testArg) ? 1 : 0;
}
bench.end(n);
if (sum < 0) console.log(sum);
}
Loading