-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.4k
perf(queriesObserver): fix O(n²) performance issue in batch updates #9467
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
Open
joseph0926
wants to merge
1
commit into
TanStack:main
Choose a base branch
from
joseph0926:perf/queries-observer-batch-updates
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+8
−2
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why don’t we just pass the
index
intoonUpdate
instead of passing the whole observer and then trying to find the index again? For example:Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the suggestion
I considered passing the index directly, but noticed these potential issues
When
setQueries()
reorders observers, existing subscriptions keep their old captured indicesThe index from
difference().forEach()
is not the actual position inthis.#observers
What do you think about these concerns?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, can you then please add a test case where the implementation I suggested would fail.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the failure only occurs with the version that captures the index in the subscription callback. When I run the same tests against either the current main branch’s queriesObserver.ts or the queriesObserver.ts in my PR, all of the tests pass without any issues.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe you, but then please add the test case to the PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Following your suggestion, I've created and run various performance tests, and I'd like to share the results. While theoretically replacing indexOf O(n) with WeakMap O(1) should improve performance, the actual test results were different from what I expected.
It seems that other optimizations like using Set in the difference function and caching in findMatchingObservers have already resolved the main O(n²) issues.
I apologize for taking up your valuable time reviewing a PR that ultimately doesn't provide substantial improvements. I would appreciate it if you could close the PR.
This has been a great learning experience, and I'm grateful for your time and feedback. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the project.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For reference, I am sharing one of the codes I tested.