Reconciliation makes more moves than necessary?

I've been interested in the reconciliation algo for a while, and I'm sort of an idiot when it comes to this stuff - it's really difficult for me to understand the reconciliation code in most of the libraries I've looked at, and frankly I didn't really trust that any of them were doing it optimally.

So I set up a use-case driven test bench with a bunch of console.log statements, so I can actually try various operations on a list, and see what sort of DOM operations result from those.

Here it is, first for Sinuous - with diff.js from the map module:

https://jsfiddle.net/mindplay/gdzrmshq/

Here, I noticed that "Rotate Up" moves 3 elements, while "Rotate Down" moves 2 elements - in either case, one move should be enough, since it's just the first/last element moving to the opposite end of the range.

I understand your code is derived from udomdiff? So here's the same test-bench for udomdiff:

https://jsfiddle.net/mindplay/o4gbaqw0/

Here, "Rotate Up" takes two moves (one of them a replaceNode) which is still one too many - while "Rotate Down" does it accurately, in a single move.

As said, I am an idiot at this stuff, but I decided to try my own naive approach - I simply remove old elements, append new elements, and then take two passes: first, I move only the nodes where moving them isn't going to break the order somewhere else - and then, I take a second pass, moving all remaining nodes that aren't already in the right place.

https://jsfiddle.net/mindplay/924xfvow/

Here, "Rotate Up" and "Rotate Down" both finish in one move.

As said, this approach is totally naive, and probably isn't blazing fast, since I'm using a two passes (and lots of comparisons with next/previous siblings) but I wanted something simple enough that I could understand it myself, being (as stated) an idiot.

Apparently, I'm not a complete idiot, because it works. 😂

I expect this simple algo could be optimized as well, because for most operations (all but "Shuffle") it doesn't actually need to do anything in the second pass - there's only one difference between the first and second pass, and it's this:

So, basically, if that second expression is ever false during the first pass, you can return before the second pass, because it would be fully identical to the first pass.

By the way, don't ask me why these loops are backwards. I've no idea if they need to be. I was just trying stuff, and it ended up this way, and it seems to work, so I didn't question it. (Might be good for micro perf anyway.)

I haven't benchmarked or optimized this at all, just throwing it up here for discussion.

Any thoughts? 🙂

For the record, I ignored the before marker, which Sinuous would need in order to diff only a range of children - I don't know if my naive approach could be adapted to account for that.

I adapted my approach to accept old/new lists of children and use a before marker - I expanded my test bench to include two adjacent lists of children, which you can now manipulate individually:

https://jsfiddle.net/mindplay/v8drqtn1/

I had to use nextSibling instead of nextElementSibling when checking the state of the DOM, because I used Comment nodes for the before markers. This should be no problem, as long as you know where your original list of children are coming from - if it's from static HTML, then yeah, this will cause problems, as it might run into a whitespace node somewhere.

I noticed you use empty Text nodes for your end markers, just wondering, why is that? It's probably harmless, but Comment seemed like a safer choice, in terms of affecting word-wrap, etc. (probably not a concern for most real-world use-cases though...)

By the way, this approach gets good results for all the common use-cases demonstrated here, except for the "Shuffle" operation - it does not get good results when you reorder the entire list of elements, so this would be slower for cases like changing the sorting of a list or table, where it'll actually end up redundantly moving some of the elements more than once.

This might be considered a "good enough" approach for most UI, but it almost definitely won't win any benchmarks for the case where 20K table rows get reordered. 😉

I believe the choice to use Text over Comment is primarily for bundle size - there's already code to create Text nodes so it's easier to reuse that by passing an empty string instead of writing a different function. Here's castNode() which does the node creation:

https://www.github.com/luwes/sinuous/tree/master/packages%2Fsinuous%2Fh%2Fsrc%2Fadd.js

I can't comment (hah) on the diff algorithm but good luck!

My doodles aside, I do think there's a small problem with udomdiff for the "Rotate Up" operation?

I've opened an issue to clear it up.

@mindplay-dk

@mindplay-dk thanks for the deep investigation, I didn't know it did that in more steps than needed.
all the algo's used in Sinuous are based on other libs, I'm pretty clueless for writing something like that.

Nice list of the fastest algo's compared
https://github.com/luwes/js-diff-benchmark

maybe a good time to bring up krausest/js-framework-benchmark#858 (comment)

Sinuous used to use the stage0 algo which turns out to be faster but the tradeoff is a bigger bundle size. I'm a little thorn on to put this back or not.

@heyheyhello @mindplay-dk what would you consider most valuable to your projects?

I ran that benchmark last night - results are probably outdated, most of these libs take about the same time.

I've been writing my own - and actually just got it passing all the tests last night. I'm using mocks and spies to ensure it completes a number of diff operations in the least possible moves. I've no idea how it performs yet though. It's probably larger too, around 600B minified atm. We'll see when it's done if it was at all worth while 😄

(I will probably try to enhance that benchmark with mocks and spies, so we can compare algos on accuracy too...)

Oh, the sizes in your benchmark are gzipped! I'm at 600B just minified, so I've got some wiggleroom still! 😉

I'll admit that I have a fear that reconciliation is very expensive and I stay away from any of those algorithms regardless of bundle size. For small lists, I'm more likely to not import sinuous/map at all and just drop/recreate the list instead.

If I had a metric like "after N list recreations for M items, you've performed more operations than if you had loaded/used map" then I'd import it, even if it was large like 5kb. I care more that reconciliation is correct and efficient, not so much the bundle size.

@mindplay-dk

@mindplay-dk Great job working on another implementation! Always important to have options :)

I'll admit that I have a fear that reconciliation is very expensive and I stay away from any of those algorithms regardless of bundle size. For small lists, I'm more likely to not import sinuous/map at all and just drop/recreate the list instead.

💯🙂✌

Though in the case of Sinuous and map, we're not really talking full-blown reconciliation - if you build, say, a sorted table with this, what you get, effectively, is reconciliation of the <tr> elements only, as opposed to React (et al) which would deep diff into every row's child nodes, just to perform a sort, for no real reason.

This is one of my selling points when I advertise Sinuous to friends 😊 - reconciliation is possible, but it's not the default, and (with almost no exceptions) recursive reconciliation is largely unnecessary work that doesn't produce any result.

That said, I believe it's very important for a framework to have this option - it would be a huge detractor for me, personally, if this feature wasn't something Sinuous offered at all. You can't always design around this need.

There's more work to do (tests, optimizations) before I publish this, but feel free to take a look:

https://bitbucket.org/mindplaydk/diff/src/master/

EDIT: now it's public 😉

By now, it passes the tests and completes every operation with the fewest possible calls to insertBefore and removeChild, which are the only two types of operations it performs. (The test uses spies to count and check the number of operations.)

It's at ~420 bytes minzipped - I've made no attempt to benchmark or optimize for size/speed yet. 🙂

I fixed some bugs and added mine to your benchmark.

(Mine is just called mine right now, it doesn't have a name.)

It's pretty much the slowest. 🕺🎉

I haven't made any attempts to optimize it yet - it's basically brute-forcing the search for the target index in the inner loop, when it decides where to move a range of elements, I'm sure that could be optimized.

I noticed the results would vary quite a lot between runs, and it seemed (in part) due to the fact that the "shuffle" operation generates a new workload for every run - the number of operations performed would vary between runs, making individual runs not really comparable, so I've seeded the RNG to make sure it's doing the same work on every run.

I was certain my approach would do it in the theoretically fewest possible DOM operations, but it appears spect does it in fewer moves than mine. My theory apparently didn't hold up after all.

I didn't really trust the benchmark, so I went and mashed on that for a bit. It seems to yield very different results between runs - most likely, garbage collection and so on is affecting the results. Also, I tried swapping around the libs, running them in different order - running my own lib either first or last definitely changed the result, so I decided to put'em all thru the ringer. I ran the benchmark 200 times, in random order, collected all the data in localStorage, and exported it to a spreadsheet. 🤓

So here's the average results from 200 randomized runs:

It was hard not to notice how most of these libraries come out practically with the top fastests ones randomly beating each other - 200 randomized runs gives us a little more clarity, and as you can see from my highlighting in green, at least five of those libraries should be considered "fast", with spect, list-difference, udomdiff, snabbdom and stage0 being essentially neck-to-neck.

Ranking them by the sum total time to complete all the benchmarks seems rather meaningless though, since the slowest test (10k) will make up almost half of that result, and every use-case is meaningful - so I've also highlighted in green, for each test, the libraries I'd consider "fast" in each category.

I've also highlighted the ones I'd consider "small", relative to the others. Note that the size of spect deviates from what's shown in your results - it clocks at 260 bytes when I run npm run test, but you have it listed at just 208 bytes? Not sure what causes this difference - but it's the smallest either way.

Based on my analysis, I'd say the performance difference between the top libraries here is largely insignificant - they each have their strong and weak points. I don't think it's possible for one library to win in all categories.

Given that spect and list-difference are the smallest, I'd consider those first - and given that spect also completes with fewer DOM operations, that would be my personal pick.

I will pull spect into my test-bench soon, and see how it handles the edge-case mentioned earlier.

Sorry if this is overwhelming. Hopefully it's also useful. I've spent a ridiculous amount of time on this. 😂

I put spect through my own test-suite, and it is definitely not accurate - it happens to do well in the benchmark, but it's less accurate in 5 of my tests. They're highlighted with TODOs in the source-code.

As for list-difference, it's also not accurate - but did better with only 3 tests requiring extra DOM operations.

I put udomdiff through the same test-suite, and it's also not accurate with 5 tests using extra DOM operations, but also, in one test-case, it actually dropped an element from the DOM - see notes in the test source. (I tried pulling the original source from the udomdiff official repo as well - in case you might have broken something while removing the get parameter, but the results were the same, the error is still there.)

Finally, I gave snabbdom the same test, and it's the only one of the four that is accurate - in two of the tests, it used replaceChild, where I used removeChild, but it completes in the same number of DOM operations.

I didn't bother testing stage0, because it isn't "small", and heckel isn't "fast", compared to the others.

I guess, based on this, you could go one of two ways:

spect or list-difference, if you want the smallest and don't care about the accuracy issues - they both basically touch all the DOM elements when performing the [3, 0, 1, 2] to [0, 1, 2, 3] operation, where an element moves from start to end.
snabbdom, if you want perfect accuracy - it's 22 bytes larger than udomdiff, but it is the only library that gets everything right.

My recommendation at this point would be snabbdom.

The reason I set out on this expedition in the first place, was because I noticed the accuracy problem - and apparently, both of the smaller libraries trade off accuracy for size.

In my opinion, we do DOM diffing to avoid focus and selection issues, to avoid randomly reloading iframes, and so on. That's the must have, in my opinion - whereas "small" and "fast" are nice to have, if possible.

I mean, if size was the only priority, you could literally just do this, right?

function diff(parent, oldChildren, newChildren, endMarker) {
  let set = new Set();
  for (let i=newChildren.length; i--;) {
    set.add(newChildren[i]);
  }
  for (let i=oldChildren.length; i--;) {
    let oldChild = oldChildren[i];
    if (!set.has(oldChild)) {
      parent.removeChild(oldChild);
    }
  }
  for (let i=newChildren.length; i--;) {
    parent.insertBefore(newChildren[i], newChildren[i+1] || endMarker);
  }
  return newChildren;
}

That's 175 bytes, and actually faster than heckl or mine.

It's also totally daft and naive, but if you really didn't care about issue with focus, selections or iframes, it gets the job done.

No, I would definitely go with snabbdom, as it's really the only one that fully solves the problem.

Amazing write up, thanks for all your research! Enjoyed learning about reconcilation and I'll consider snabbdom when I need to eventually integrate it into my apps/framework

@heyheyhello

@heyheyhello your "fork of Sinuous" looks interesting, though it looks more like a rewrite than a fork? I have a toy project along the same lines myself, for which I chose dipole, another reactive lib you might want to check out. 🙂

Started as a fork. I love Sinuous a lot and I still keep most of sinuous/h but I was very into TSX and type hints/validation while Sinuous is more into tag templates. I originally ported sinuous/observable to TS but eventually wrote my own reactive library - I kept tripping on things like accidental subscriptions leading to infinite loops and the browser locking up... wanted more debuggability and explicitness. Just landing support for lazy-computeds now.

I'll check out dipole. I wish there was a dircetory of reactive libraries. I've learned from too many to mention, but reactor.js, anod, derivablejs, and flyd are all worth checking out if you haven't yet; or take a look at haptic's wire when I'm done settling it :)

@mindplay-dk

@mindplay-dk wow you went deep down the rabbit hole 😃 love it!

@heyheyhello Haptic looks really cool, great name as well.

lazy computeds makes sense, I think someone here needed this functionality as well
#162

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

Reconciliation makes more moves than necessary? #160

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Reconciliation makes more moves than necessary? #160

Description

Activity

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 6, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 7, 2021

tsugabloom commented on Apr 7, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 9, 2021

luwes commented on Apr 10, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 13, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 13, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 13, 2021

tsugabloom commented on Apr 14, 2021

tsugabloom commented on Apr 14, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 16, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 16, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 17, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 17, 2021

tsugabloom commented on Apr 17, 2021

mindplay-dk commented on Apr 18, 2021

tsugabloom commented on Apr 19, 2021

luwes commented on Apr 20, 2021

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions