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 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

Simple HBase ORM

When dealing with data stored in HBase, you are quick to come to a conclusion, that it is extremaly inconvenient to reach to it via HBase native API. It is very verbose and you always need to convert between bytes and simple types - a pain. While I wa...When dealing with data stored in HBase, you are quick to come to a conclusion, that it is extremaly inconvenient to reach to it via HBase native API. It is very verbose and you always need to convert between bytes and simple types - a pain. While I wa...

Spock, Java and Maven

Few months ago I've came across Groovy - powerful language for JVM platform which combines the power of Java with abilities typical for scripting languages (dynamic typing, metaprogramming).

Together with Groovy I've discovered spock framework (https://code.google.com/p/spock/) - specification framework for Groovy (of course you can test Java classes too!). But spock is not only test/specification framework - it also contains powerful mocking tools.

Even though spock is dedicated for Groovy there is no problem with using it for Java classes tests. In this post I'm going to describe how to configure Maven project to build and run spock specifications together with traditional JUnit tests.


Firstly, we need to prepare pom.xml and add necessary dependencies and plugins.

Two obligatory libraries are:
<dependency>
<groupid>org.spockframework</groupId>
<artifactid>spock-core</artifactId>
<version>0.7-groovy-2.0</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupid>org.codehaus.groovy</groupId>
<artifactid>groovy-all</artifactId>
<version>${groovy.version}</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
Where groovy.version is property defined in pom.xml for more convenient use and easy version change, just like this:
<properties>
<gmaven-plugin.version>1.4</gmaven-plugin.version>
<groovy.version>2.1.5</groovy.version>
</properties>

I've added property for gmaven-plugin version for the same reason ;)

Besides these two dependencies, we can use few additional ones providing extra functionality:
  • cglib - for class mocking
  • objenesis - enables mocking classes without default constructor
To add them to the project put these lines in <dependencies> section of pom.xml:
<dependency>
<groupid>cglib</groupId>
<artifactid>cglib-nodep</artifactId>
<version>3.0</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupid>org.objenesis</groupId>
<artifactid>objenesis</artifactId>
<version>1.3</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>

And that's all for dependencies section. Now we will focus on plugins necessary to compile Groovy classes. We need to add gmaven-plugin with gmaven-runtime-2.0 dependency in plugins section:
<plugin>
<groupid>org.codehaus.gmaven</groupId>
<artifactid>gmaven-plugin</artifactId>
<version>${gmaven-plugin.version}</version>
<configuration>
<providerselection>2.0</providerSelection>
</configuration>
<executions>
<execution>
<goals>
<goal>compile</goal>
<goal>testCompile</goal>
</goals>
</execution>
</executions>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupid>org.codehaus.gmaven.runtime</groupId>
<artifactid>gmaven-runtime-2.0</artifactId>
<version>${gmaven-plugin.version}</version>
<exclusions>
<exclusion>
<groupid>org.codehaus.groovy</groupId>
<artifactid>groovy-all</artifactId>
</exclusion>
</exclusions>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupid>org.codehaus.groovy</groupId>
<artifactid>groovy-all</artifactId>
<version>${groovy.version}</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
</plugin>

With these configuration we can use spock and write our first specifications. But there is one issue: default settings for maven-surefire plugin demand that test classes must end with "..Test" postfix, which is ok when we want to use such naming scheme for our spock tests. But if we want to name them like CommentSpec.groovy or whatever with "..Spec" ending (what in my opinion is much more readable) we need to make little change in surefire plugin configuration:
<plugin>
<groupid>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactid>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.15</version>
<configuration>
<includes>
<include>**/*Test.java</include>
<include>**/*Spec.java</include>
</includes>
</configuration>
</plugin>

As you can see there is a little trick ;) We add include directive for standard Java JUnit test ending with "..Test" postfix, but there is also an entry for spock test ending with "..Spec". And there is a trick: we must write "**/*Spec.java", not "**/*Spec.groovy", otherwise Maven will not run spock tests (which is strange and I've spent some time to figure out why Maven can't run my specs).

Little update: instead of "*.java" postfix for both types of tests we can write "*.class" what is in my opinion more readable and clean:
<include>**/*Test.class</include>
<include>**/*Spec.class</include>
(thanks to Tomek Pęksa for pointing this out!)

With such configuration, we can write either traditional JUnit test and put them in src/test/java directory or groovy spock specifications and place them in src/test/groovy. And both will work together just fine :) In one of my next posts I'll write something about using spock and its mocking abilities in practice, so stay in tune.