Deque vs Queue Speed | 易学教程

问题

I was working on a problem on LeetCode (Here). When I finished the problem, I came up with:

class MovingAverage {
    std::deque<int> numsToAverage;
    int maxSize;
    int currentTotal;
public:
    /** Initialize your data structure here. */
    MovingAverage(int size) {
        maxSize = size;
        currentTotal = 0;
    }

    double next(int val) 
    {
        currentTotal += val;
        numsToAverage.push_back(val);

        if (numsToAverage.size() > maxSize)
        {
            currentTotal -= numsToAverage[0];
            numsToAverage.pop_front();
        }

        return (double)currentTotal / (double)numsToAverage.size();
    }
};

Afterwards, I saw that another solution was very similar to mine but used a queue. Out of curiosity, I swapped only the deque to a queue and I jumped from the 18th percentile (deque) to the 56th percentile (queue). Here's the queue code:

class MovingAverage {
    std::queue<int> numsToAverage;
    int maxSize;
    int currentTotal;
public:
    /** Initialize your data structure here. */
    MovingAverage(int size) {
        maxSize = size;
        currentTotal = 0;
    }

    double next(int val) 
    {
        currentTotal += val;
        numsToAverage.push(val);

        if (numsToAverage.size() > maxSize)
        {
            currentTotal -= numsToAverage.front();
            numsToAverage.pop();
        }

        return (double)currentTotal / (double)numsToAverage.size();
    }
};

My question is specifically why? I checked std::queue and it defaults to a deque! Why on earth would it be faster just because it's a queue? My only guess is that it's caching that value some where? But at the same time, a queue, by default IS a deque! The insertion/deletion time literally can't be better!

(Side note, I don't account for the case where size == 0 because the question doesn't test for it. In fact, their code violently shatters if you hand it 0)

回答1:

Here is an educated guess:

Memory controllers have a prefetch "handedness" that rewards consecutive, ascending memory accesses but is slower for accesses in descending order.
Accordingly, deques used as a FIFO container have a preferred direction for pushing on one side and popping on the other.
Likely, your deque code uses the least favored direction. But the queue implementation is already optimized to use the underlying deque in its most favored direction.
There is an easy way to test this hypothesis (given that these are non-guaranteed implementation details). In your deque code, switch push_back --> push_front and pop_front --> pop_back. If the hypothesis is correct, the deque code should speed-up to just as fast as the queue implementation :-)

来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41255736/deque-vs-queue-speed

标签

c++

performance

queue

deque