...
| Fetch descendants | Omit Descendants | Direct Descendants | All Descendants |
|---|---|---|---|
| Query | //openroadm-device[@ne-state="inservice"] | //openroadm-device[@ne-state="inservice"] | //openroadm-device[@ne-state="inservice"] |
| Comparison graph |
|
|
|
| Graph detail |
|
|
|
Time complexity of | Unclear, as there is very high variance. Likely O(N). | O(N2) | O(N2) |
| Time complexity of proposed solution | O(N) | O(N) | O(N) |
In above cases, it is observed that the existing algorithm grows quadratically - O(n2), e.g. doubling from 1000 to 2000 nodes takes 4 times longer (going from 40 to 160 seconds).
The PoC algorithm grows linearly - O(n), e.g. doubling from 1000 to 2000 nodes takes 2 times longer (going from 3.5 to 7 seconds).
Query all devices (N out of N) using absolute cps path
...
| Fetch descendants | Omit Descendants | Direct Descendants | All Descendants |
|---|---|---|---|
| Query | /openroadm-devices/openroadm-device[@status="success"] | /openroadm-devices/openroadm-device[@status="success"] | /openroadm-devices/openroadm-device[@status="success"] |
| Comparison graph |
|
|
|
| Graph detail |
|
|
|
Time complexity of | Unclear, as there is very high variance. Likely O(N). | O(N2) | O(N2) |
| Time complexity of proposed solution | O(N) | O(N) | O(N) |
...
Possible improvements of proposed solution
...