http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660That happens when you get the code even slightly wrong http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment21http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment21Sun, 02 Mar 2008 00:12:02 GMTInteresting.... I get Security.VerificationException at run time. I was working on a patch for MicroKernel DefaultActivator and I can't even get your simple code to run. Is it a 3.5 thing? Operation could destabilize the runtime. System.Security.VerificationException: Operation could destabilize the runtime. at CreateIntance(Int32 , String ) http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment20http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment20Sun, 02 Mar 2008 00:08:07 GMTdominique , Not really relevant, because it is object creation we are testing. http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment19http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment19Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:00:36 GMTWhat about if you use properties (with accessors get/set) instead of public variables (Num and Name) ? Have you test the same with vb.net ? I am curious about these two points. Thanks http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment18http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment18Sat, 01 Mar 2008 10:43:32 GMTMark, Creating a new dyamic method: 00.0012487 Creating a single object using Activator.CreateInstance: 0.0000063033382 I wouldn't worry about it http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment17http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment17Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:48:51 GMTMartin, I haven't checked. http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment16http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment16Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:50:03 GMTThank you for teaching me something new today :) What's the overhead associated with creating the dynamic method? When you create a million objects, it's probably neglegible, but what if you are only creating a few? Is there a break-even where, below that number of objects, one of the other methods is more efficient, but for a higher number, a dynamic method is the best performer? http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment15http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment15Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:03:43 GMTI've posted an alternative to these approaches using Linq expression trees: http://rogeralsing.com/2008/02/28/linq-expressions-creating-objects/ http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment14http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment14Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:45:42 GMTOne interesting twist would to be running the same tests, but passing in a constant string. You're not creating 1 million objects here - you're creating *at least* 2 million. I haven't run all of your tests, but just the "call the constructor" one: and on my laptop, creating 100 million instances goes down from taking 28.6 seconds to 0.97 seconds when you pass in "x" as the string parameter. Turning off method inlining pushes it up to 1.46 seconds. In other words, at first sight (and I'm aware that benchmarking is a horribly fiddly business) the actual object creation is only taking about 5% of the time. The rest is the constant hit of converting an integer into a string. Given that information, I think it's worth rerunning all the tests. Suddenly all the overheads of delegates will look more significant, and Activator.CreateInstance will be an absolute dinosaur - I suspect. None of this detracts from your point that creating objects is indeed very cheap. http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment13http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment13Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:32:08 GMTDo you have figures when creating transient objects with IoC.Resolve? Just curious.. http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment12http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment12Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:31:29 GMTJust curious, how long does the "i.ToString()" call take in this test? http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment11http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment11Thu, 28 Feb 2008 05:17:18 GMTAnother option is available in .NET 3.5. Build a lambda expression tree and compile it into a delegate. No need to write Emit statements as in the dynamic IL approach. http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment10http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment10Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:12:16 GMTumm, err, ignore that last comment; that is basically what you did (I was thinking generic referred to .NET Generics). I feel dumb sometimes. http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment9http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment9Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:00:25 GMTThere is generator.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg, 5) http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment8http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment8Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:59:36 GMTI meant with the opcodes: ILGenerator gen = method.GetILGenerator(); gen.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);// i gen.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_1);// s gen.Emit(OpCodes.Newobj, ctor);// new Created there is: OpCodes.Ldarg_0 OpCodes.Ldarg_1 OpCodes.Ldarg_2 OpCodes.Ldarg_3 but there isn't an OpCodes.Ldarg_4. How would you load one with more arguments? I figure those are shortcuts the compiler could use, but you should be able to generate a function which returns a "create instance" delegate with more arguments. I was trying to see if I could write a dynamic method with this signature: delegate Created CreateCtor(params object[] s); http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment7http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment7Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:50:24 GMTBill Um, the same way? http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment6http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment6Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:25:07 GMTChad, I refuse to care about that kind of number. :-) http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment5http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment5Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:23:42 GMTHow would you generate a method to call a constructor which has more than 3 arguments? http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment4http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment4Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:37:16 GMTAyende: Oops, I was talkin' about the diff between the Dynamic Method and calling 'new' directly. The diff/instance of those is 0.0000001370171 seconds http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment3http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment3Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:59:24 GMTWhich 0.00007 seconds are you talking about? That is the cost of creating an object using Activator.CreateInstance http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment2http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment2Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:13:58 GMTThe extra 0.000007 seconds is probably in the call of the delegate, and not in the instance create. What if you called the delegate directly from the loop instead of calling a func that calls another func? http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment1http://ayende.com/3167/creating-objects-perf-implications#comment1Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:11:30 GMT