Click here to Skip to main content
Click here to Skip to main content

Benchmarking Direct, Delegate and Reflection Method Invocations

By , 5 Jan 2003
 

Introduction

This article was inspired by:

Both of these articles have inspired me to do some benchmarking of the three forms of function invocation offered in C#:

  • Direct call
  • via a delegate
  • via reflection

As I am in the prototyping stages of an "application automation layer" (The Application Automation Layer: Introduction And Design [^] and The Application Automation Layer - Design And Implementation of The Bootstrap Loader And The Component Manager [^]) which currently relies heavily on method invocation via reflection, I thought I should take the advice of both of these articles and look at the performance of my current implementation.

The results are rather astonishing.

Benchmarking C#

Didn't I read somewhere on CP that the Microsoft license agreement specifically says "thou shalt not benchmark .NET!"? Well, that's yet another commandment I've broken.

I decided to write a really simple benchmarking program, not for the purposes of gleaning minor differences between the three types of function invocation, but to determine if there are any large differences. The benchmark program compares:

Benchmark Matrix
Type Direct Delegate Reflection
Static, No parameters - - -
Static, With parameters - - -
Instance, No parameters - - -
Instance, With parameters - - -

The results are as follows:

You will notice that reflection is approximately 50 times slower than direct calls. This means that I am going to have to seriously reconsider my implementation in the AAL!

Some Code

The program benchmarks twelve different types of invocation. They all look basically like this:

public static void StaticDirectCallWithoutParams()
{
    ++count;
}

simply consisting of a counter increment.

At the beginning of the program, the delegates and reflection methods are initialized along with a couple of embedded constants controlling the number of times the test is run, and how many milliseconds we spend calling the function under test:

CallBenchmark cb=new CallBenchmark();

SNPCall snpCall=new SNPCall(StaticDelegateWithoutParams);
SPCall spCall=new SPCall(StaticDelegateWithParams);
INPCall inpCall=new INPCall(cb.InstanceDelegateWithoutParams);
IPCall ipCall=new IPCall(cb.InstanceDelegateWithParams);

MethodInfo snpMI=GetMethodInfo
 ("CallBenchmark.exe/CallBenchmark.CallBenchmark/StaticInvokeWithoutParams");
MethodInfo spMI=GetMethodInfo
 ("CallBenchmark.exe/CallBenchmark.CallBenchmark/StaticInvokeWithParams");
MethodInfo inpMI=GetMethodInfo
 ("CallBenchmark.exe/CallBenchmark.CallBenchmark/InstanceInvokeWithoutParams");
MethodInfo ipMI=GetMethodInfo
 ("CallBenchmark.exe/CallBenchmark.CallBenchmark/InstanceInvokeWithParams");

int sampleSize=20;    // # of samples
int timerInterval=200;  // in ms

A timer is set up to stop the test:

Timer timer=new Timer(timerInterval);
timer.AutoReset=false;
timer.Stop();
timer.Elapsed+=new ElapsedEventHandler(OnTimerEvent);

...

static void OnTimerEvent(object src, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
    done=true;
}

And each test looks something like this:

++n;
count=0;
done=false;
timer.Start();
while (!done)
{
    StaticDirectCallWithParams(1, 2, 3);
}
benchmarks[n]+=count;

Rocket science, isn't it?

Conclusion

This little test clearly shows the performance hit taken by invoking methods using reflection. Even considerations like CPU caching wouldn't account for this significant variance (I think!). Obviously, I need to rethink my architecture implementation.

License

This article has no explicit license attached to it but may contain usage terms in the article text or the download files themselves. If in doubt please contact the author via the discussion board below.

A list of licenses authors might use can be found here

About the Author

Marc Clifton
United States United States
Member
Marc is the creator of two open source projets, MyXaml, a declarative (XML) instantiation engine and the Advanced Unit Testing framework, and Interacx, a commercial n-tier RAD application suite.  Visit his website, www.marcclifton.com, where you will find many of his articles and his blog.
 
Marc lives in Philmont, NY.

Sign Up to vote   Poor Excellent
Add a reason or comment to your vote: x
Votes of 3 or less require a comment

Comments and Discussions

 
Hint: For improved responsiveness ensure Javascript is enabled and choose 'Normal' from the Layout dropdown and hit 'Update'.
You must Sign In to use this message board.
Search this forum  
    Spacing  Noise  Layout  Per page   
GeneralThe difference with method body is different (45 % - 50%)memberasherab15 May '06 - 10:42 
Generalpoor performance of delegatesmemberhnipak5 Aug '03 - 23:47 
GeneralOne questionmembermcarbenay14 Jan '03 - 10:55 
GeneralRe: One questionmemberMarc Clifton14 Jan '03 - 12:14 
GeneralMy thoughts againmemberleppie7 Jan '03 - 7:20 
GeneralRe: My thoughts againmemberMarc Clifton7 Jan '03 - 11:16 
GeneralRe: My thoughts againmemberleppie7 Jan '03 - 11:54 
GeneralRe: My thoughts againmemberJonathan de Halleux22 Sep '03 - 4:06 
GeneralCommentmemberJörgen Sigvardsson7 Jan '03 - 6:40 
GeneralRe: CommentmemberMarc Clifton7 Jan '03 - 11:14 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   

Permalink | Advertise | Privacy | Mobile
Web01 | 2.6.130516.1 | Last Updated 6 Jan 2003
Article Copyright 2003 by Marc Clifton
Everything else Copyright © CodeProject, 1999-2013
Terms of Use
Layout: fixed | fluid