Iteration Performance of Numerical Libraries in .NET
by Trevor Misfeldt
Introduction
I've been implementing numerical libraries in .NET and have come
to some conclusions about iteration performance. My classes have to hold a large amount of data and be able to iterate through that data as quickly as possible. In order to compare various methods, I created a simple class called Data that encapsulates an array of doubles.
Method #1: Enumeration
Data implements IEnumerable. It contains GetEnumerator which returns its own DataEnumerator, an inner class.
...
public DataEnumerator GetEnumerator()
{
return new DataEnumerator( this );
}
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return GetEnumerator();
}
}
...
public struct DataEnumerator : IEnumerator
{
private Data internal_;
private int index_;
public DataEnumerator( Data data )
{
internal_ = data;
index_ = 1;
}
public double Current
{
get
{
return internal_.Array[index_];
}
}
object IEnumerator.Current
{
get
{
return Current;
}
}
public bool MoveNext()
{
index_++;
if ( index_ >= internal_.Array.Length )
{
return false;
}
return true;
}
public void Reset()
{
index_ = -1;
}
}
}
...
Method #2: Indexing
I implemented an index operator on the class which simply calls the index operator on the array.
public double this[int position]
{
get
{
return array_[position];
}
}
Method #3: Indirect Array
I created a property to access the array.
public double[] Array
{
get
{
return array_;
}
}
When iterating, I called the Array property and then its index operator.
d = data.Array[j];
Method #4: Direct Array
I created a reference to the array.
double[] array = data.Array;
Then, I iterate through that reference.
d = array[j];
Method #5: Pointer Math
Finally, I tried improving performance by iterating through the array in Managed C++ using pointer manipulation.
static void iterate( Data& data )
{
double d;
double __pin* ptr = &( data.Array[0] );
for ( int i = 0; i < data.Array.Length; i++ )
{
d = *ptr;
++ptr;
}
}
I called it this way:
Pointer.iterate( data );
Conclusions
To test the different methods, I allocated 1,000,000 doubles into an array and indexed over all of them. I repeated this 1,000 times to minimize randomness. Here are the results...
Enumeration is always slow. That's not surprising as I'm using a general data structure to hold the doubles.
The three operator/property methods differed very slightly. These are probably all optimized similarly.
Using pointer math to traverse over the raw data was significantly faster. This is probably due to the fact that there's no bounds checking.
In summary, if you have large amounts of data and performance is critical, consider using managed C++.
Source Code
You can download a zip file containing the source code referenced
in thios article from here: code.zip (6 KB)
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Mark Vulfson of ProWorks for tips on using Flipper Graph Control. Also, to my colleagues Ken Baldwin and Steve Sneller at CenterSpace Software.
About the Author
Trevor Misfeldt is the co-founder and CEO of CenterSpace Software
which specializes in .NET numerical method libraries. Trevor has
worked as a software engineer for eight years. He has held
demanding positions for a variety of firms using C++, Java,
.NET, and other technologies, including Rogue Wave Software,
CleverSet Inc., and ProWorks. He is coauthor of Elements of
Java Style, published by Cambridge University Press, and is
currently working on a follow-up book for C++. He has also
served on a course advisory board of the University of
Washington. His teams have won the JavaWorld "GUI Product of the Year" and XML Magazine "Product of the Year" awards. Trevor holds a BSc in Computer Science from the University of British Columbia and a BA in Economics from the University of Western Ontario.