Benchmarks

Test System

• 15-inch Macbook Air M2, 2023 (my personal laptop)
• rust-parallel uses 8 parallel jobs by default on this machine
• MacOS 14.2.1

Test Setup

• Run echo on 1000 strings 1 to 1000
• Benchmarks run using hyperfine testing tool
• Link to benchmark script

Summary

• rust-parallel is 1.29 times faster when the path cache is enabled (this is enabled by default)
• rust-parallel is 1.54 times faster than xargs with 8 processes. Note that this use of xargs does not prevent output interleaving.
• rust-parallel is 12.50 times faster than GNU parallel

Versions

$ rust-parallel -V
rust-parallel 1.16.1

$ parallel -V
GNU parallel 20240222

Results

Benchmark 1: seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel echo
  Time (mean ± σ):     156.6 ms ±   0.6 ms    [User: 219.6 ms, System: 600.1 ms]
  Range (min … max):   155.5 ms … 157.6 ms    19 runs

Benchmark 2: seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel --disable-path-cache echo
  Time (mean ± σ):     202.1 ms ±   0.9 ms    [User: 234.2 ms, System: 831.7 ms]
  Range (min … max):   200.1 ms … 203.4 ms    14 runs

Benchmark 3: seq 1 1000 | xargs -P8 -L1 echo
  Time (mean ± σ):     241.9 ms ±   1.2 ms    [User: 144.5 ms, System: 508.5 ms]
  Range (min … max):   240.1 ms … 244.2 ms    12 runs

Benchmark 4: seq 1 1000 | parallel echo
  Time (mean ± σ):      1.957 s ±  0.021 s    [User: 2.545 s, System: 3.542 s]
  Range (min … max):    1.942 s …  2.001 s    10 runs

Summary
  seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel echo ran
    1.29 ± 0.01 times faster than seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel --disable-path-cache echo
    1.54 ± 0.01 times faster than seq 1 1000 | xargs -P8 -L1 echo
   12.50 ± 0.14 times faster than seq 1 1000 | parallel echo