Use mutative instead of immer #243
Merged
Conversation
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
|
View Vercel preview at instant-www-js-perf3-jsv.vercel.app. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Immer autofreezes objects. When the object is really large, this gets more and more costly. I switched us to mutative, which does not rely on auto-freeze. They have a comparison about immer vs mutative here.
I made a bunch of transactions in our perf tester.
Before
many_tx_immer.json
A single transaction ontop of the bench query on immer is about 8ms. As you add more pending transactions, it grows to about 40ms.
After
many_tx_mutative.json
Mutative is about 3ms on a single transaction. As I add more pending transactions, the size seems to stay at 3ms!
@dwwoelfel @markyfyi @nezaj