stream: replace queue and readRequests with buffer list for performance improvement

[rluvaton]

webstream possible improvement:

BufferList implementation

00:24:29.343 confidence improvement accuracy (*) (**) (***)
00:24:29.343 webstreams/creation.js kind='ReadableStream' n=50000 1.04 % ±3.94% ±5.25% ±6.83%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/creation.js kind='TransformStream' n=50000 0.06 % ±2.59% ±3.45% ±4.52%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/creation.js kind='WritableStream' n=50000 0.19 % ±4.60% ±6.12% ±7.98%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=100000 1.58 % ±4.24% ±5.64% ±7.34%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=100000 1.13 % ±4.28% ±5.69% ±7.41%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=100000 1.50 % ±4.50% ±5.99% ±7.79%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=512 n=100000 1.04 % ±5.26% ±7.00% ±9.12%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=100000 2.24 % ±5.31% ±7.07% ±9.20%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=100000 3.03 % ±4.62% ±6.15% ±8.00%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=100000 2.97 % ±5.12% ±6.81% ±8.86%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=512 n=100000 3.92 % ±4.65% ±6.19% ±8.06%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=100000 -0.04 % ±4.14% ±5.50% ±7.16%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=100000 -1.05 % ±4.87% ±6.48% ±8.43%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=100000 2.22 % ±4.57% ±6.07% ±7.91%
00:24:29.343 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=512 n=100000 -2.14 % ±4.71% ±6.27% ±8.16%
00:24:29.344 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=100000 1.56 % ±4.40% ±5.85% ±7.62%
00:24:29.344 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=100000 0.54 % ±4.56% ±6.06% ±7.89%
00:24:29.344 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=100000 3.16 % ±4.44% ±5.91% ±7.70%
00:24:29.344 webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=512 n=100000 0.90 % ±4.70% ±6.26% ±8.16%
00:24:29.344 webstreams/readable-async-iterator.js n=100000 0.03 % ±7.40% ±9.84% ±12.81%
00:24:29.344 00:24:29.344 Be aware that when doing many comparisons the risk of a false-positive
00:24:29.344 result increases. In this case, there are 20 comparisons, you can thus
00:24:29.344 expect the following amount of false-positive results:
00:24:29.344 1.00 false positives, when considering a 5% risk acceptance (*, **, ***),
00:24:29.344 0.20 false positives, when considering a 1% risk acceptance (**, ***),
00:24:29.344 0.02 false positives, when considering a 0.1% risk acceptance (***)

From my local tests:

Before

❯ ./node ./benchmark/webstreams/pipe-to.js
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,073,259.5235043082
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,112,582.388083188
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,130,721.9334553012
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,137,875.2107408328
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,145,415.4228369598
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,119,071.6166112064
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,112,401.620591177
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,122,177.222643778
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,154,120.0021085772
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,137,931.8271974607
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,150,085.2975136968
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,120,964.4298001872
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,126,744.873505527
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,148,843.5697545216
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,133,865.2778680783
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,132,648.4636818648

After

❯ ./node ./benchmark/webstreams/pipe-to.js
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,191,920.5427624737
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,199,980.044139869
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,196,830.8757150145
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=512 n=5000000: 1,209,921.9163751516
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,199,785.7782492938
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,191,548.2411812833
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,205,993.3892632995
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=1024 n=5000000: 1,191,874.810445273
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,209,462.7154360572
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,187,768.408534668
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,195,187.8509158778
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=2048 n=5000000: 1,201,572.702366821
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=512 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,197,150.4825638772
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=1024 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,179,266.3281946357
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=2048 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,205,445.1767767125
webstreams/pipe-to.js highWaterMarkW=4096 highWaterMarkR=4096 n=5000000: 1,235,058.8880696953

[ronag]

I think using FixedQueue would have better performance?

[rluvaton]

remove todos

[rluvaton]

Benchmark CI for BufferList implementation

https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1369/

[rluvaton]

the pipe-to benchmark takes too long, it's currently running for an hour.

Each iteration (single combination) takes 9 seconds. there are 16 possible combinations.
so 9 seconds * 16 combination * 30 runs * 2 versions = 2 hours and 24 minutes...

new Benchmark CI that has reduced the number of chunks from 5M to 100K for BufferList implementation
https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1370/

[rluvaton]

remove

[rluvaton]

I think using FixedQueue would have better performance?

Could not make it work, the tests failed for some reason...

---

current BufferList does not show any improvement so closing this