Loops performance in Groovy

IntroductionIn the 2018 Advent of Code challenged I solved all the puzzles in Groovy. It is pretty obvious, that choosing good data structure is the most important to obtain performant solution. However, the way we iterate over those structures is also…

Introduction

In the 2018 Advent of Code challenged I solved all the puzzles in Groovy. It is pretty obvious, that choosing good data structure is the most important to obtain performant solution. However, the way we iterate over those structures is also very significant, at least when using Groovy.

Measuring performance

I want to measure how long it takes to sum some numbers. For testing performance of loops I prepared a small function that simply sums some numbers:

void printAddingTime(String message, long to, Closure<Long> adder) {
    LocalTime start = LocalTime.now()
    long sum = adder(to)
    println("$message: $sum calculated in ${Duration.between(start, LocalTime.now()).toMillis()} ms")
}

Pseudo code for summing functions is below:

for i = 1 to n
  for j = 1 to n
    sum += i * j
  end
end

Loops types

Let’s implement the summing function in various ways.

collect and sum

First loop type is to use built-in (by Groovy) function collect and sum on collections (Range it this example):

(1..n).collect { long i ->
  (1..n).collect { long j ->
    i * j
  }.sum()
}.sum()

each

Next, let’s write the same function using each built-in function on collections (Range it this example) and then add results to accumulator variable:

long sum = 0
(1..n).each { long i ->
    (1..n).each { long j ->
        sum += i * j
    }
}
return sum

times

Now instead of using each we could use the function times built-in on Number by Groovy:

long sum = 0
n.times { long i ->
  n.times { long j ->
    sum += (i + 1)*(j+1)
  }
}
return sum

We have to add 1 to i and j because times generates numbers from 0 to n exclusive.

LongStream with sum

Java 8 came with a new feature – streams. One example of streams is LongStream. Fortunately, it has sum built-in function, which we can use:

LongStream.range(0, n).map { i ->
    LongStream.range(0, n).map { j ->
        (i + 1) * (j + 1)
    }.sum()
}.sum()

LongStream generates numbers in the same way as times function, so we also have to add 1 to i and j here.

LongStream with manual sum

Instead of sum function on LongStream, we can add all numbers manually:

long sum = 0
LongStream.range(0, n).forEach { i ->
    LongStream.range(0, n).forEach { j ->
        sum += (i + 1) * (j + 1)
    }
}
return sum

while

Of course since Groovy inherits from Java a big part of its syntax, we can use the while loop:

long sum = 0
long i = 1
while(i <= n){
    long j = 1
    while(j <= n){
        sum+= i*j
        ++j
    }
    ++i
}
return sum

for

As we can use while, we can also use for loop in Groovy:

long sum = 0
for (long i = 1; i <= n; ++i) {
    for (long j = 1; j <= n; ++j) {
        sum += i * j
    }
}
return sum

 

Results

My tests I run on Java 1.8 and Groovy 2.5.5. Script loops.groovy was fired using bash script:

#!/bin/sh
for x in 10 100 1000 10000 100000; do
  echo $x
  groovy loops.groovy $x
  echo
done

Values are in milliseconds

Loop  n 10 100 1000 10000 100000
collect + sum 7 22 216 16244 1546822
each 12 17 118 7332 706781
times 2 10 109 8264 708684
LongStream + sum 7 17 127 7679 763341
LongStream + manual sum 18 35 149 6857 680804
while 8 20 103 3166 301967
for 7 10 25 359 27966

As you can spot, for small amount of iterations using built-in Groovy functions is good enough, but for much bigger amount of iterations we should use while or for loops like in plain, old Java.

Show me the code

Code for those examples are available here. You can run those examples on your machine and check performance on your own.

You May Also Like

How to use mocks in controller tests

Even since I started to write tests for my Grails application I couldn't find many articles on using mocks. Everyone is talking about tests and TDD but if you search for it there isn't many articles.

Today I want to share with you a test with mocks for a simple and complete scenario. I have a simple application that can fetch Twitter tweets and present it to user. I use REST service and I use GET to fetch tweets by id like this: http://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/show/236024636775735296.json. You can copy and paste it into your browser to see a result.

My application uses Grails 2.1 with spock-0.6 for tests. I have TwitterReaderService that fetches tweets by id, then I parse a response into my Tweet class.


class TwitterReaderService {
Tweet readTweet(String id) throws TwitterError {
try {
String jsonBody = callTwitter(id)
Tweet parsedTweet = parseBody(jsonBody)
return parsedTweet
} catch (Throwable t) {
throw new TwitterError(t)
}
}

private String callTwitter(String id) {
// TODO: implementation
}

private Tweet parseBody(String jsonBody) {
// TODO: implementation
}
}

class Tweet {
String id
String userId
String username
String text
Date createdAt
}

class TwitterError extends RuntimeException {}

TwitterController plays main part here. Users call show action along with id of a tweet. This action is my subject under test. I've implemented some basic functionality. It's easier to focus on it while writing tests.


class TwitterController {
def twitterReaderService

def index() {
}

def show() {
Tweet tweet = twitterReaderService.readTweet(params.id)
if (tweet == null) {
flash.message = 'Tweet not found'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

[tweet: tweet]
}
}

Let's start writing a test from scratch. Most important thing here is that I use mock for my TwitterReaderService. I do not construct new TwitterReaderService(), because in this test I test only TwitterController. I am not interested in injected service. I know how this service is supposed to work and I am not interested in internals. So before every test I inject a twitterReaderServiceMock into controller:


import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
import spock.lang.Specification

@TestFor(TwitterController)
class TwitterControllerSpec extends Specification {
TwitterReaderService twitterReaderServiceMock = Mock(TwitterReaderService)

def setup() {
controller.twitterReaderService = twitterReaderServiceMock
}
}

Now it's time to think what scenarios I need to test. This line from TwitterReaderService is the most important:


Tweet readTweet(String id) throws TwitterError

You must think of this method like a black box right now. You know nothing of internals from controller's point of view. You're only interested what can be returned for you:

  • a TwitterError can be thrown
  • null can be returned
  • Tweet instance can be returned

This list is your test blueprint. Now answer a simple question for each element: "What do I want my controller to do in this situation?" and you have plan test:

  • show action should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown and inform about error
  • show action should redirect to index and inform if tweet is not found
  • show action should show found tweet

That was easy and straightforward! And now is the best part: we use twitterReaderServiceMock to mock each of these three scenarios!

In Spock there is a good documentation about interaction with mocks. You declare what methods are called, how many times, what parameters are given and what should be returned. Remember a black box? Mock is your black box with detailed instruction, e.g.: I expect you that if receive exactly one call to readTweet with parameter '1' then you should throw me a TwitterError. Rephrase this sentence out loud and look at this:


1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }

This is a valid interaction definition on mock! It's that easy! Here is a complete test that fails for now:


import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
import spock.lang.Specification

@TestFor(TwitterController)
class TwitterControllerSpec extends Specification {
TwitterReaderService twitterReaderServiceMock = Mock(TwitterReaderService)

def setup() {
controller.twitterReaderService = twitterReaderServiceMock
}

def "show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }
0 * _._
flash.message == 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
response.redirectUrl == '/twitter/index'
}
}

| Failure: show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown(pl.refaktor.twitter.TwitterControllerSpec)
| pl.refaktor.twitter.TwitterError
at pl.refaktor.twitter.TwitterControllerSpec.show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown_closure1(TwitterControllerSpec.groovy:29)

You may notice 0 * _._ notation. It says: I don't want any other mocks or any other methods called. Fail this test if something is called! It's a good practice to ensure that there are no more interactions than you want.

Ok, now I need to implement controller logic to handle TwitterError.


class TwitterController {

def twitterReaderService

def index() {
}

def show() {
Tweet tweet

try {
tweet = twitterReaderService.readTweet(params.id)
} catch (TwitterError e) {
log.error(e)
flash.message = 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

[tweet: tweet]
}
}

My tests passes! We have two scenarios left. Rule stays the same: TwitterReaderService returns something and we test against it. So this line is the heart of each test, change only returned values after >>:


1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }

Here is a complete test for three scenarios and controller that passes it.


import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
import spock.lang.Specification

@TestFor(TwitterController)
class TwitterControllerSpec extends Specification {

TwitterReaderService twitterReaderServiceMock = Mock(TwitterReaderService)

def setup() {
controller.twitterReaderService = twitterReaderServiceMock
}

def "show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }
0 * _._
flash.message == 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
response.redirectUrl == '/twitter/index'
}

def "show should inform about not found tweet"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> null
0 * _._
flash.message == 'Tweet not found'
response.redirectUrl == '/twitter/index'
}


def "show should show found tweet"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> new Tweet()
0 * _._
flash.message == null
response.status == 200
}
}

class TwitterController {

def twitterReaderService

def index() {
}

def show() {
Tweet tweet

try {
tweet = twitterReaderService.readTweet(params.id)
} catch (TwitterError e) {
log.error(e)
flash.message = 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

if (tweet == null) {
flash.message = 'Tweet not found'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

[tweet: tweet]
}
}

The most important thing here is that we've tested controller-service interaction without logic implementation in service! That's why mock technique is so useful. It decouples your dependencies and let you focus on exactly one subject under test. Happy testing!