I saved some vue-files as attachment in my pouchdb. At the start of the application the app should load all vue-files from pouchdb, adding it to router and get render on runtime. My current problem: How can get the content (text) of the vue file, so I can import or parse it at runtime.
import PouchDB from 'pouchdb';
const dbsfc = new PouchDB('db_components');
dbsfc.replicate.from('http://167.86.69.128:5984/single_file_components/', {live: true, retry: true});
dbsfc.getAttachment('login', 'Login.vue', function(err, blob_buffer) {
if (err) {
return console.log(err);
} else {
console.log(blob_buffer);
}
});
What I get in my console:
Uint8Array(6204) [60, 116, 101, 109, 112, 108, 97, 116, 101, 62, 10, 32, 32, 60, 100, 105, 118, 32, 99, 108, 97, 115, 115, 61, 34, 119, 114, 97, 112, 112, 101, 114, 32, 102, 97, 100, 101, 73, 110, 68, 111, 119, 110, 34, 62, 10, 32, 32, 32, 32, 60, 100, 105, 118, 32, 105, 100, 61, 34, 102, 111, 114, 109, 67, 111, 110, 116, 101, 110, 116, 34, 62, 10, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 60, 33, 45, 45, 32, 76, 111, 103, 105, 110, 32, 70, 111, 114, 109, 32, 45, 45, 62, 10, 32, …][0 … 99][100 … 199][200 … 299][300 … 399][400 … 499][500 … 599][600 … 699][700 … 799][800 … 899][900 … 999][1000 … 1099][1100 … 1199][1200 … 1299][1300 … 1399][1400 … 1499][1500 … 1599][1600 … 1699][1700 … 1799][1800 … 1899][1900 … 1999][2000 … 2099][2100 … 2199][2200 … 2299][2300 … 2399][2400 … 2499][2500 … 2599][2600 … 2699][2700 … 2799][2800 … 2899][2900 … 2999][3000 … 3099][3100 … 3199][3200 … 3299][3300 … 3399][3400 … 3499][3500 … 3599][3600 … 3699][3700 … 3799][3800 … 3899][3900 … 3999][4000 … 4099][4100 … 4199][4200 … 4299][4300 … 4399][4400 … 4499][4500 … 4599][4600 … 4699][4700 … 4799][4800 … 4899][4900 … 4999][5000 … 5099][5100 … 5199][5200 … 5299][5300 … 5399][5400 … 5499][5500 … 5599][5600 … 5699][5700 … 5799][5800 … 5899][5900 … 5999][6000 … 6099][6100 … 6199][6200 … 6203]type: "application/octet-stream"__proto__: Uint8Array
My pouchdb doc:
{
"_id": "login",
"_rev": "3-a0a86cc1f4edc56a8bed8982ac00eb8c",
"_attachments": {
"Login.vue": {
"content_type": "application/octet-stream",
"revpos": 2,
"digest": "md5-u0vcUl76jzVfN12h2fAL7g==",
"length": 6204,
"stub": true
}
}
}
What I was expecting:
<template>
<div class="wrapper fadeInDown">
...
</template>
<script>...</script>
<style>
...
</style>
I haven't worked with pouchDB but I suppose you shall change your content type to e.g. "text/plain".
Another option is to convert octet-stream data to text:
let string = new TextDecoder("utf-8").decode(blob_buffer);
For the following function:
func CycleClock(c *ballclock.Clock) int {
for i := 0; i < fiveMinutesPerDay; i++ {
c.TickFive()
}
return 1 + CalculateBallCycle(append([]int{}, c.BallQueue...))
}
where c.BallQueue is defined as []int and CalculateBallCycle is defined as func CalculateBallCycle(s []int) int. I am having a huge performance decrease between the for loop and the return statement.
I wrote the following benchmarks to test. The first benchmarks the entire function, the second benchmarks the for loop, while the third benchmarks the CalculateBallCycle function:
func BenchmarkCycleClock(b *testing.B) {
for i := ballclock.MinBalls; i <= ballclock.MaxBalls; i++ {
j := i
b.Run("BallCount="+strconv.Itoa(i), func(b *testing.B) {
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
c, _ := ballclock.NewClock(j)
CycleClock(c)
}
})
}
}
func BenchmarkCycle24(b *testing.B) {
for i := ballclock.MinBalls; i <= ballclock.MaxBalls; i++ {
j := i
b.Run("BallCount="+strconv.Itoa(i), func(b *testing.B) {
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
c, _ := ballclock.NewClock(j)
for k := 0; k < fiveMinutesPerDay; k++ {
c.TickFive()
}
}
})
}
}
func BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123(b *testing.B) {
m := []int{8, 62, 42, 87, 108, 35, 17, 6, 22, 75, 116, 112, 39, 119, 52, 60, 30, 88, 56, 36, 38, 26, 51, 31, 55, 120, 33, 99, 111, 24, 45, 21, 23, 34, 43, 41, 67, 65, 66, 85, 82, 89, 9, 25, 109, 47, 40, 0, 83, 46, 73, 13, 12, 63, 15, 90, 121, 2, 69, 53, 28, 72, 97, 3, 4, 94, 106, 61, 96, 18, 80, 74, 44, 84, 107, 98, 93, 103, 5, 91, 32, 76, 20, 68, 81, 95, 29, 27, 86, 104, 7, 64, 113, 78, 105, 58, 118, 117, 50, 70, 10, 101, 110, 19, 1, 115, 102, 71, 79, 57, 77, 122, 48, 114, 54, 37, 59, 49, 100, 11, 14, 92, 16}
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
CalculateBallCycle(m)
}
}
Using 123 balls, this gives the following result:
BenchmarkCycleClock/BallCount=123-8 200 9254136 ns/op
BenchmarkCycle24/BallCount=123-8 200000 7610 ns/op
BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123-8 3000000 456 ns/op
Looking at this, there is a huge disparity between benchmarks. I would expect that the first benchmark would take roughly ~8000 ns/op since that would be the sum of the parts.
Here is the github repository.
EDIT:
I discovered that the result from the benchmark and the result from the running program are widely different. I took what #yazgazan found and modified the benchmark function in main.go mimic somewhat the BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123 from main_test.go:
func Benchmark() {
for i := ballclock.MinBalls; i <= ballclock.MaxBalls; i++ {
if i != 123 {
continue
}
start := time.Now()
t := CalculateBallCycle([]int{8, 62, 42, 87, 108, 35, 17, 6, 22, 75, 116, 112, 39, 119, 52, 60, 30, 88, 56, 36, 38, 26, 51, 31, 55, 120, 33, 99, 111, 24, 45, 21, 23, 34, 43, 41, 67, 65, 66, 85, 82, 89, 9, 25, 109, 47, 40, 0, 83, 46, 73, 13, 12, 63, 15, 90, 121, 2, 69, 53, 28, 72, 97, 3, 4, 94, 106, 61, 96, 18, 80, 74, 44, 84, 107, 98, 93, 103, 5, 91, 32, 76, 20, 68, 81, 95, 29, 27, 86, 104, 7, 64, 113, 78, 105, 58, 118, 117, 50, 70, 10, 101, 110, 19, 1, 115, 102, 71, 79, 57, 77, 122, 48, 114, 54, 37, 59, 49, 100, 11, 14, 92, 16})
duration := time.Since(start)
fmt.Printf("Ballclock with %v balls took %s;\n", i, duration)
}
}
This gave the output of:
Ballclock with 123 balls took 11.86748ms;
As you can see, the total time was 11.86 ms, all of which was spent in the CalculateBallCycle function. What would cause the benchmark to run in 456 ns/op while the running program runs in around 11867480 ms/op?
You wrote that CalcualteBallCycle() modifies the slice by design.
I can't speak to correctness of that approach, but it is why benchmark time of BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123 is so different.
On first run it does the expected thing but on subsequent runs it does something completely different, because you're passing different data as input.
Benchmark this modified code:
func BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123v2(b *testing.B) {
m := []int{8, 62, 42, 87, 108, 35, 17, 6, 22, 75, 116, 112, 39, 119, 52, 60, 30, 88, 56, 36, 38, 26, 51, 31, 55, 120, 33, 99, 111, 24, 45, 21, 23, 34, 43, 41, 67, 65, 66, 85, 82, 89, 9, 25, 109, 47, 40, 0, 83, 46, 73, 13, 12, 63, 15, 90, 121, 2, 69, 53, 28, 72, 97, 3, 4, 94, 106, 61, 96, 18, 80, 74, 44, 84, 107, 98, 93, 103, 5, 91, 32, 76, 20, 68, 81, 95, 29, 27, 86, 104, 7, 64, 113, 78, 105, 58, 118, 117, 50, 70, 10, 101, 110, 19, 1, 115, 102, 71, 79, 57, 77, 122, 48, 114, 54, 37, 59, 49, 100, 11, 14, 92, 16}
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
tmp := append([]int{}, m...)
CalculateBallCycle(tmp)
}
}
This works-around this behavior by making a copy of m, so that CalculateBallCycle modifies a local copy.
The running time becomes more like the others:
BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123-8 3000000 500 ns/op
BenchmarkCalculateBallCycle123v2-8 100 10483347 ns/op
In your CycleClock function, you are copying the c.BallQueue slice. You can improve performance significantly by using CalculateBallCycle(c.BallQueue) instead (assuming CalculateBallCycle doesn't modify the slice)
For example:
func Sum(values []int) int {
sum := 0
for _, v := range values {
sum += v
}
return sum
}
func BenchmarkNoCopy(b *testing.B) {
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
Sum(m)
}
}
func BenchmarkWithCopy(b *testing.B) {
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
Sum(append([]int{}, m...))
}
}
// BenchmarkNoCopy-4 20000000 73.5 ns/op
// BenchmarkWithCopy-4 5000000 306 ns/op
// PASS
There is a subtle bug in your tests.
Both methods BenchmarkCycleClock and BenchmarkCycle24 run the benchmark in a for loop, passing a closure to b.Run. Inside of those closures you initialize the clocks using the loop variable i like this:ballclock.NewClock(i).
The problem is, that all instances of your anonymous function share the same variable. And, by the time the function is run by the test runner, the loop will be finished, and all of the clocks will be initialized using the same value: ballclock.MaxBalls.
You can fix this using a local variable:
for i := ballclock.MinBalls; i <= ballclock.MaxBalls; i++ {
i := i
b.Run("BallCount="+strconv.Itoa(i), func(b *testing.B) {
for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
c, _ := ballclock.NewClock(i)
CycleClock(c)
}
})
}
The line i := i stores a copy of the current value of i (different for each instance of your anonymous function).