Skip to content

SSZ-QL: Optimize ParsePath for faster path parsing #15886

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

SSZ-QL: Optimize ParsePath for faster path parsing #15886

wants to merge 4 commits into from
+66 −44

Conversation

Sahil-4555
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

Other

What does this PR do? Why is it needed?
This PR refactors the ParsePath function to improve performance

Which issues(s) does this PR fix?
This PR addresses inefficiencies in ParsePath that caused extra allocations and slower path resolution. It enhances overall query execution performance within the #15767 feature.

Acknowledgements

@Sahil-4555
Copy link
Contributor Author

@syjn99 — since you contributed to the original ParsePath implementation, I’d really value your feedback on these optimizations. Please let me know if you spot any potential regressions or areas for further improvement.

goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/OffchainLabs/prysm/v6/encoding/ssz/query
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-8565U CPU @ 1.80GHz
                                       │ changes_bench.txt │          original_bench.txt          │
                                       │      sec/op       │   sec/op     vs base                 │
ParsePath/simple_path-8                        161.6n ± 9%   314.0n ± 5%   +94.37% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/path_with_leading_dot-8              174.2n ± 6%   327.4n ± 6%   +87.97% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/nested_arrays-8                      258.5n ± 3%   562.3n ± 2%  +117.52% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/deep_nested-8                        259.7n ± 3%   484.8n ± 7%   +86.69% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/path_with_multiple_indices-8         324.1n ± 4%   837.3n ± 4%  +158.33% (p=0.000 n=10)
geomean                                        227.7n        472.2n       +107.35%

                                       │ changes_bench.txt │         original_bench.txt          │
                                       │       B/op        │    B/op     vs base                 │
ParsePath/simple_path-8                         128.0 ± 0%   216.0 ± 0%   +68.75% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/path_with_leading_dot-8               144.0 ± 0%   232.0 ± 0%   +61.11% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/nested_arrays-8                       176.0 ± 0%   312.0 ± 0%   +77.27% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/deep_nested-8                         240.0 ± 0%   456.0 ± 0%   +90.00% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/path_with_multiple_indices-8          232.0 ± 0%   560.0 ± 0%  +141.38% (p=0.000 n=10)
geomean                                         178.4        331.3        +85.73%

                                       │ changes_bench.txt │          original_bench.txt          │
                                       │     allocs/op     │  allocs/op   vs base                 │
ParsePath/simple_path-8                         2.000 ± 0%    4.000 ± 0%  +100.00% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/path_with_leading_dot-8               2.000 ± 0%    4.000 ± 0%  +100.00% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/nested_arrays-8                       4.000 ± 0%    8.000 ± 0%  +100.00% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/deep_nested-8                         2.000 ± 0%    5.000 ± 0%  +150.00% (p=0.000 n=10)
ParsePath/path_with_multiple_indices-8          5.000 ± 0%   11.000 ± 0%  +120.00% (p=0.000 n=10)
geomean                                         2.759         5.882       +113.15%

syjn99
syjn99 reviewed Oct 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@syjn99 syjn99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey, thanks for optimizing!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

1 more reviewer

@syjn99 syjn99 syjn99 left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@Sahil-4555 @syjn99