rmoretto

rmoretto

Help to simplify/optimize a function

Hello!

So I currently have the following problem: I want to take a map and “sanitize” all the integers fields. Basically verifying if that field value is really an int and replace the parsed value in the map, furthermore, if the verified value is not an valid int it should save nil to the field, for example:

Input Map

%{
    int_a: "1",
    int_b: "not_a_int!"
%}

Output Map:

%{
    int_a: 1,
    int_b: nil
%}

On the system that I am currently working I know that all the integers fields in the map will start with the int_ prefix (important to say that I don’t have full access to the struct of the map, so I can’t write a function that uses a specific field) so I wrote the following code:

def parse_map_int_fields(map) do
    ints_map =
      map 
      # Filter all the Integers field
      |> Enum.filter(fn {k, _v} -> Atom.to_string(k) |> String.starts_with?("int_") end)
      # Remove all fields that are nil or ints
      |> Enum.filter(fn {_k, v} -> !is_integer(v) and !is_nil(v) end)
      # Parse the values to int, returning nil if invalid
      |> Enum.map(fn {key, val} ->
        case Integer.parse(val) do
          :error ->
            {key, nil}

          {parsed, _} ->
            {key, parsed}
        end
      end)
      |> Map.new()
    
    # Merge the original map with the "sanitized" map
    Map.merge(map, ints_map)
  end

Another point is that this code will be ran in a lot of maps (5 to 10 millions maps) with on average 15 fields per map, so I have two questions:

  1. Most important, can this code be simplified? From my perspective it look a little bit convoluted, I would appreciate any tips!
  2. How one would optimize this function? I have wrote a simple benchmark using Benchee that gave me the following results:
Operating System: Linux
CPU Information: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Eight-Core Processor
Number of Available Cores: 16
Available memory: 15.63 GB
Elixir 1.11.2
Erlang 23.2.3

Benchmark suite executing with the following configuration:
warmup: 2 s
time: 5 s
memory time: 0 ns
parallel: 1
inputs: none specified
Estimated total run time: 7 s

Benchmarking parse_map_int_fields...

Name                           ips        average  deviation         median         99th %
parse_map_int_fields      857.59 K        1.17 μs  ±2149.16%        1.01 μs        2.12 μs

Code used for the benchmark:

defmodule Sanitizer do
  def parse_map_int_fields(map) do
    ints_map =
      map
      |> Enum.filter(fn {k, _v} -> Atom.to_string(k) |> String.starts_with?("int_") end)
      |> Enum.filter(fn {_k, v} -> !is_integer(v) and !is_nil(v) end)
      |> Enum.map(fn {key, val} ->
        case Integer.parse(val) do
          :error ->
            {key, nil}

          {parsed, _} ->
            {key, parsed}
        end
      end)
      |> Map.new()

    Map.merge(map, ints_map)
  end
end

test_map = %{
  int_a: "1",
  int_b: "not_a_int!",
  str_a: "This is a string field",
  str_b: "Another string field",
  fl_a: 0.0
}

Benchee.run(%{
  "parse_map_int_fields" => fn -> Sanitizer.parse_map_int_fields(test_map) end
})

Which isn’t all that bad for my use case, but in the interest of learning I would like to know if something could be done different.

Thanks to all! :smiley:

Most Liked

gregvaughn

gregvaughn

I haven’t benchmarked, but you could do something with a for comprehension

iex(103)> map = %{
...(103)>     int_a: "1",
...(103)>     int_b: "not_a_int!",
...(103)>     other: "leave me alone"
...(103)> }
%{int_a: "1", int_b: "not_a_int!", other: "leave me alone"}
iex(104)> for {k, v} <- map, match?("int" <> _, Atom.to_string(k)), into: map do
...(104)>   case Integer.parse(v) do
...(104)>     {int, _} -> {k, int}
...(104)>     _other -> {k, nil}
...(104)>   end
...(104)> end
%{int_a: 1, int_b: nil, other: "leave me alone"}
rmoretto

rmoretto

Thanks people for all the responses!

Indeed a lot of way to approach the problem, I will probably use the @amnu3387 response just because is a little bit faster, but as Eric said, is just a matter of taste, and all other options would be completely fine.

Thanks again for the help!

The benchmark results were:

Name                             ips        average  deviation         median         99th %
mnussbaumer_response        927.74 K        1.08 μs  ±2239.93%        0.96 μs        1.98 μs
kokolegorille_response      867.51 K        1.15 μs  ±2327.39%        1.00 μs        2.14 μs
gregvaughn_response         766.18 K        1.31 μs  ±2168.73%        1.15 μs        2.31 μs
ericgray_response           730.43 K        1.37 μs  ±1314.86%        1.26 μs        2.48 μs
chungwong_response          655.58 K        1.53 μs  ±1555.15%        1.36 μs        2.78 μs
parse_map_int_fields        567.61 K        1.76 μs  ±1491.38%        1.57 μs        3.18 μs

Comparison:
mnussbaumer_response        927.74 K
kokolegorille_response      867.51 K - 1.07x slower +0.0748 μs
gregvaughn_response         766.18 K - 1.21x slower +0.23 μs
ericgray_response           730.43 K - 1.27x slower +0.29 μs
chungwong_response          655.58 K - 1.42x slower +0.45 μs
parse_map_int_fields        567.61 K - 1.63x slower +0.68 μs

And the code used for the benchmark:

defmodule Sanitizer do
  def parse_map_int_fields(map) do
    ints_map =
      map
      |> Enum.filter(fn {k, _v} -> Atom.to_string(k) |> String.starts_with?("int_") end)
      |> Enum.filter(fn {_k, v} -> !is_integer(v) and !is_nil(v) end)
      |> Enum.map(fn {key, val} ->
        case Integer.parse(val) do
          :error ->
            {key, nil}

          {parsed, _} ->
            {key, parsed}
        end
      end)
      |> Map.new()

    Map.merge(map, ints_map)
  end

  def kokolegorille_response(map) do
    Map.new(map, fn {_k, _v} = el ->
      if has_to_be_sanitized?(el), do: sanitize(el), else: el
    end)
  end

  defp has_to_be_sanitized?({k, v}) do
    Atom.to_string(k) |> String.starts_with?("int_") and !is_integer(v) and !is_nil(v)
  end

  defp sanitize({k, v}) do
    case Integer.parse(v) do
      :error ->
        {k, nil}

      {parsed, _} ->
        {k, parsed}
    end
  end

  def chungwong_response(map) do
    parse(map)
  end

  def parse(m) when is_map(m), do: parse(Map.to_list(m), [])
  def parse([], acc), do: Enum.into(acc, %{})
  def parse([{k, v} | t], acc), do: parse(t, prepend({to_string(k), v}, acc))

  def prepend({"int_" <> _ = k, v}, acc) when is_binary(v),
    do: [{String.to_atom(k), to_integer(Integer.parse(v))} | acc]

  def prepend({k, v}, acc), do: [{String.to_atom(k), v} | acc]

  def to_integer(:error), do: nil
  def to_integer({parsed, _}), do: parsed

  def ericgray_response(map) do
    Enum.reduce(map, %{}, &do_parse_map_int_fields/2)
  end

  # Reconstruct or accumulate key value pairs into a new map
  def do_parse_map_int_fields({key, value}, map) do
    case starts_with_int?(key) do
      true ->
        Map.put(map, key, parse_value(value))

      false ->
        Map.put(map, key, value)
    end
  end

  # Boolean function returns true if field is int
  def starts_with_int?(key) do
    key
    |> Atom.to_string()
    |> String.starts_with?("int_")
  end

  # Parses the value of int field, if not an integer return nil
  def parse_value(value) do
    case Integer.parse(value) do
      {value, _} -> value
      :error -> nil
    end
  end

  def mnussbaumer_response(map) do
    reshape_map_int_fields(map)
  end

  @spec reshape_map_int_fields(map) :: map
  def reshape_map_int_fields(map) when is_map(map),
    do:
      Enum.reduce(map, %{}, fn {k, v}, acc ->
        Map.put(acc, k, maybe_reshape(k, v))
      end)

  @spec maybe_reshape(atom, term) :: integer | term
  def maybe_reshape(k, v) when is_atom(k) and not is_integer(v) and not is_nil(v) do
    case Atom.to_string(k) do
      <<"int_", _>> ->
        case Integer.parse(v) do
          {new_val, _} -> new_val
          _ -> nil
        end

      _ ->
        v
    end
  end

  def maybe_reshape(_, v), do: v

  def gregvaughn_response(map) do
    for {k, v} <- map, match?("int" <> _, Atom.to_string(k)), into: map do
      case Integer.parse(v) do
        {int, _} -> {k, int}
        _other -> {k, nil}
      end
    end
  end
end

test_map = %{
  int_a: "1",
  int_b: "not_a_int!",
  str_a: "This is a string field",
  str_b: "Another string field",
  fl_a: 0.0
}

Benchee.run(%{
  "parse_map_int_fields" => fn -> Sanitizer.parse_map_int_fields(test_map) end,
  "kokolegorille_response" => fn -> Sanitizer.kokolegorille_response(test_map) end,
  "chungwong_response" => fn -> Sanitizer.chungwong_response(test_map) end,
  "ericgray_response" => fn -> Sanitizer.ericgray_response(test_map) end,
  "mnussbaumer_response" => fn -> Sanitizer.mnussbaumer_response(test_map) end,
  "gregvaughn_response" => fn -> Sanitizer.gregvaughn_response(test_map) end
})
eksperimental

eksperimental

you can optimize it even more:
def maybe_reshape(k, v) when is_atom(k) and is_binary(v) do

Last Post!

dimitarvp

dimitarvp

Naive solution on a first try:

defmodule IntMapSanitizer do
  @test_map_1 %{
    greet: "Hirrow",
    int_a: "17",
    int_b: "gibberish",
    int_c: "428",
    farewell: "Aufwiedersehen"
  }

  defp is_int_name?(k) when is_atom(k) do
    k
    |> Atom.to_string()
    |> String.starts_with?("int_")
  end

  defp should_keep?(v) when is_nil(v) or is_integer(v), do: false
  defp should_keep?(_), do: true

  defp parse_to_int_or_nil(v) do
    case Integer.parse(v) do
      :error ->
        nil

      {parsed, _} ->
        parsed
    end
  end

  def sanitize(%{} = map) do
    for {k, v} <- map, is_int_name?(k), should_keep?(v), reduce: map do
      acc -> Map.update(acc, k, nil, &parse_to_int_or_nil(&1))
    end
  end

  def test1() do
    sanitize(@test_map_1)
  end
end

Try in iex:

iex(1)> IntMapSanitizer.test1()
%{
  farewell: "Aufwiedersehen",
  greet: "Hirrow",
  int_a: 17,
  int_b: nil,
  int_c: 428
}

Haven’t measured but for comprehensions with filters and the reduce option have always been fairly fast in my experience.

Maybe if you make a public GitHub repo then we can make a benchmarking arena. :slight_smile:

Where Next?

Popular in Questions Top

RisingFromAshes
I’ve read in another post that it may be possible with a router helper - but I couldn’t find an appropriate one, and tbh, I’m still just ...
New
minhajuddin
I have seen a lot of code which picks the first element from a list using Enum.at(0) instead of List.first. Is there a reason why people ...
New
vonH
When I run the Plug and I recompile I wind up having to use Ctrl C to quit iex and start again. Witht the help of rlwrap I can use the cu...
New
jononomo
For some reason my phoenix channels are working for me in my local dev environment, but as soon as I deploy via Docker, I get a 403 error...
New
nsuchy
Hi. I’ve noticed that Windows Powershell has it’s own IEX command and you cannot access Elixir’s IEX due to the conflict. This isn’t a cr...
New
jerry
Good day to you all. I have been struggling to get a query involving like and ilike to work. Can anyone assist me on this, please? pro...
New
pmjoe
I have a relationship of love and hate with Elixir. Lots of things are just absolutely right, but there are some things that are kind of ...
New

Other popular topics Top

Qqwy
Original source of discussion: This topic on the Pragmatic Programmers’ Functional Web Development with Elixir, OTP, and Phoenix forum. ...
New
openscript
Hello! Sorry for this astonishing simple question, but I’m really stuck. I try to set up the intellij-elixir plugin, but I don’t know ho...
New
stefanchrobot
What’s the safe way to decode a JSON string into a struct? I want to avoid calling String.to_atom. Jason.decode can give me a map with st...
New
chrismccord
Phoenix 1.4.0 released Phoenix 1.4 is out! This release ships with exciting new features, most notably with HTTP2 support, improved deve...
688 31494 112
New
WestKeys
Currently suffering from paralysis by [HTTP client] analysis. This is rather unusual in Elixirland as there tends to be consensus on the ...
New
JorisKok
I have a server on AWS, and was running a load test using artillery. When looking at the Phoenix dashboard I see the Ports going to 100% ...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement