Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Should LINQ be avoided because it's slow? [closed]

I've had been told that since .net linq is so slow we shouldn't use it and was wondering anyone else has come up with the same conclusion, and example is:

Took 1443ms to do 1000000000 compares non-LINQ.
Took 4944ms to do 1000000000 compares with LINQ.
(243% slower)

the non-LINQ code:

for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {     foreach (MyLinqTestClass1 item in lst1) //100000 items in the list     {         if (item.Name == "9999")         {             isInGroup = true;             break;         }     } } 

Took 1443ms to do 1000000000 compares non-LINQ.

LINQ code:

for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++)       isInGroup = lst1.Cast<MyLinqTestClass1>().Any(item => item.Name == "9999");   

Took 4944ms to do 1000000000 compares with LINQ.

I guess its possible to optimize the LINQ code but the thought was that its easily to get really slow LINQ code and given that it shouldn't be used. Given that LINQ is slow then it would also follow that PLINQ is slow and NHibernate LINQ would be slow so any kind on LINQ statement should not be used.

Has anyone else found that LINQ is so slow that they wished they had never used it, or am I making a too general conclusion based on benchmarks like this?

like image 341
user455095 Avatar asked Sep 22 '10 14:09

user455095


People also ask

Should I avoid LINQ for performance reasons?

LINQ syntax is typically less efficient than a foreach loop. It's good to be aware of any performance tradeoff that might occur when you use LINQ to improve the readability of your code. And if you'd like to measure the performance difference, you can use a tool like BenchmarkDotNet to do so.

Is LINQ really that slow?

Conclusion. It would seem the performance of LINQ is similar to more basic constructs in C#, except for that notable case where Count was significantly slower. If performance is important it's crucial to do benchmarks on your application rather than relying on anecdotes (including this one).

Why LINQ is slower than for loop?

In general, for identical code, linq will be slower, because of the overhead of delegate invocation. If, however, you are processing a large array of data, and applying relatively simple calculations to the elements, you will get a huge performance increase if: You use an array to store the data.

Is LINQ fast?

LINQ is absolutely 100% slower You are going to essentially "stall-out" if you are performing any complex queries, joins etc... total p.o.s for those types of functions/methods- just don't use it.


2 Answers

Should Linq be avoided because its slow?

No. It should be avoided if it is not fast enough. Slow and not fast enough are not at all the same thing!

Slow is irrelevant to your customers, your management and your stakeholders. Not fast enough is extremely relevant. Never measure how fast something is; that tells you nothing that you can use to base a business decision on. Measure how close to being acceptable to the customer it is. If it is acceptable then stop spending money on making it faster; it's already good enough.

Performance optimization is expensive. Writing code so that it can be read and maintained by others is expensive. Those goals are frequently in opposition to each other, so in order to spend your stakeholder's money responsibly you've got to ensure that you're only spending valuable time and effort doing performance optimizations on things that are not fast enough.

You've found an artificial, unrealistic benchmark situation where LINQ code is slower than some other way of writing the code. I assure you that your customers care not a bit about the speed of your unrealistic benchmark. They only care if the program you're shipping to them is too slow for them. And I assure you, your management cares not a bit about that (if they're competent); they care about how much money you're spending needlessly to make stuff that is fast enough unnoticably faster, and making the code more expensive to read, understand, and maintain in the process.

like image 52
Eric Lippert Avatar answered Sep 19 '22 23:09

Eric Lippert


Why are you using Cast<T>()? You haven't given us enough code to really judge the benchmark, basically.

Yes, you can use LINQ to write slow code. Guess what? You can write slow non-LINQ code, too.

LINQ greatly aids expressiveness of code dealing with data... and it's not that hard to write code which performs well, so long as you take the time to understand LINQ to start with.

If anyone told me not to use LINQ (especially LINQ to Objects) for perceived reasons of speed I would laugh in their face. If they came up with a specific bottleneck and said, "We can make this faster by not using LINQ in this situation, and here's the evidence" then that's a very different matter.

like image 27
Jon Skeet Avatar answered Sep 23 '22 23:09

Jon Skeet