PostSharp has no effect on speed

I have stumbled on an impossibly good performance behaviour with PostSharp. To evaluate the speed I wrote a little program, that would execute one function a specified number of times, and if PostSharp is enable it would generate and delete a few hundred strings, just in memory (non fixed composition, so they are not auto-interned). The loop executes in a non-trivial (a few milliseconds) amount of time.

Now, I am unable to measure the difference on a few million runs, and a crazy run of ~40 billion iterations amounted to a difference of just a few nanoseconds vs non-PostSharp version doing the same number of calls. To me, this is impossible. There must be something wrong with my test. I had the code peer-reviewed by my co-workers, so I am fairly confident the code does what I intend it to.

So, is there something wrong with using string generation (which is the expected use in the intended applications) as the slow-running simulation for 开发者_如何学编程the benchmarks?

Alternatively, has someone else performed (or know of) a PostSharp's runtime performance analysis?

Thank you.

---

On a 3 GHz processor, 40 billion clock cycles alone will take 13 seconds - and I sincerely doubt that a single iteration is taking just one clock cycle. Something's definitely wrong with your test.

Something's likely getting optimized away - maybe it sees that you're doing the same thing over and over again and is deciding not to do it at all (except the first time). You need to make sure you're randomizing your data when you do perf analysis.

---

I have done performance tests. They were published in PostSharp Blog

Some aspects can have the same performance as hand written code if they don't use features such as: reflection, access to method parameters, access to method instance. Since PostSharp emits MSIL instructions, the generated code can be inlined by the JIT compiler.

As reminded in other answers, be sure that (1) PostSharp is indeed invoked (use Reflector on the resulting assembly) and (2) you're using the Stopwatch properly. If you're comparing the average time of a single test, it's normal that the difference between PostSharp and hand-written code is just a few nanoseconds (in the hypothesis that you don't use expensive features).

---

Can you change your test, such that the generated strings are used in the next iteration (string length written to the console) or something like that? Maybe the compiler optimizes your program in such a way that either the postsharp-function is not executed at all or that it is called asynchronously or executed on another cpu, because there is no reason to sync with the other iterations. If you link it more tightly, this may force then the compiler, to synchronize the actions.