Optimizing Peformance with Hash Objects
When did the humanity experience the golden age of software code performance optimization? I would give my biased answer, it was in the 1980’s. No, I don’t have any hard data to support this claim. I just remember how games kept evolving on some very limited hardware, back in those days of my childhood.
The golden years of code optimization
That was the age of 8-bit personal computers with truly limited memory. In Finland, the gaming computer of every school boy was the iconic Commodore 64 with only 64 kilobytes of memory. The Commodore era lasted about one decade before the market was finally saturated with the next generation 16-bit computers.
What is truly remarkable, is just how much the software improved during those long ten years. The games written for Commodore 64 toward the end of the era were true master pieces of software code optimization. It’s just mind blowing how complex games emerged for that whiny piece of hardware!
Importance of code optimization today
In today’s abundance of computer hardware and super efficient CPUs, it appears that software of our time is often quite lousily crafted, at least seen from the performance perspective.
There’s no lack of articles on so many forums promoting software “paradigms” that are quite disastrous for the CPU performance. It may appear like vanity even to bother to look at performance, but the reality will eventually hit hard when you have to create software that has to process huge quantities of data.
Then it becomes very evident that quite many hyped coding techniques just don’t serve well anymore, and you will find yourself spending huge piles of money paying for CPU time to compensate for lavish code.
How to optimize?
It turns out, often the best approach to optimize code does not involve introducing another framework X to magically “fix everything”. Instead, the important thing to do is to have a look into the code at the fundamental level and ask the question, “what does this code really do”. Although this might sound boring, I will say that going back to basics is powerful!
Lists versus hashes
Now, time to compile this article into something practical and have a look at how lists are very commonly being accessed in almost any software and how some tightly-sitting coding habits can be dealing devastating blows to code perfomance!
I’ll use Ruby language for the example, but the principle applies to every other modern programming language, such as Python, JavaScript, Java etc.
Let’s find an entry from an array using the convenient array find method:
In the example above, we find the first fruit from the list of fruits that starts with “k” (you’ll get “kiwi”).
That’s very nice. But how does it perform when you have some more entries in your list? Let’s find out!
On my machine, I am getting durations around 0.15 seconds to find my entry from the list of one million strings. Let’s stop here for a second and think about this a little. First of all, why on earth would you do this and filter arrays at all in your code?
This kind of a situation may occur, for example, when you execute a database query and then further filter the data in your code. You might want to do so because sometimes you need to apply conditions that are too complex or impossible to express in the database query only.
Okay, then the other question. To spend 0.15 seconds to comb through one million entries, is it good or bad? It certainly beats hands down any librarian (at least a librarian without a PC, of course). But the truth is that if your code has to spend those 0.15 seconds iterating lists all over again, that innocent tiny glitch will turn into a monster that slowly eats up your master piece and keeps you waking up sweaty in the middle of the night!
So maybe there is a way to optimize this a code little. If there is a list in the memory and you have to access it multiple times, then wrapping the list into a hash object may actually be worth trying:
I just found out that placing the list into a hash object was a really good idea. My PC tells me that getting my object of interest from the hash was almost 30 000 times faster than finding it from the list!