Splitting benchmark for numbers and complex arrays.

As part of #25 realized that numeric matchers are orders of magnitude slow not because  of inherent issue within the matcher specific  code, but instead because the benchmarks were stressed while checking for complex arrays (don't have a better term for this yet, think "json arrays within arrays within ..." )

After splitting the matchers into two and introducing a second PARTIAL_COMBO benchmark, I was able to identify a regression I would have introduced within the ByteMachine.java for numeric ranges.

As part of this change we're also changing the citylots2.json.gz file and adding a new firstCoordinates key for numeric matching only. I tried other existing properties first but as none of them have floating points or large numbers, the benchmarks results were not matching my expectations.

README.md

@@ -688,10 +688,11 @@ prefix-match, suffix-match, equals-ignore-case-match, wildcard-match, numeric-ma
 counts the matches, yields the following on a 2019 MacBook:
 
 Events are processed at over 220K/second except for:
- - equals-ignore-case matches, which are processed at over 180K/second.
+ - equals-ignore-case matches, which are processed at over 200K/second.
  - wildcard matches, which are processed at over 170K/second.
- - anything-but matches, which are processed at over 110K/second.
- - numeric matches, which are processed at over 2.5K/second.
+ - anything-but matches, which are processed at over 150K/second.
+ - numeric matches, which are processed at over 120K/second.
+ - complex array matches, which are processed at over 2.5K/second.
 
 ### Suggestions for better performance
 

src/test/software/amazon/event/ruler/Benchmarks.java

@@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ public class Benchmarks {
     };
     private final int[] EQUALS_IGNORE_CASE_MATCHES = { 131, 211, 1758, 825, 116386 };
 
-    private final String[] NUMERIC_RULES = {
+    private final String[] COMPLEX_ARRAYS_RULES = {
       "{\n" +
               "  \"geometry\": {\n" +
               "    \"type\": [ \"Polygon\" ],\n" +
@@ -223,7 +223,48 @@ public class Benchmarks {
               "  }\n" +
               "}"
     };
-    private final int[] NUMERIC_MATCHES = { 227, 2, 149444, 64368, 127485 };
+    private final int[] COMPLEX_ARRAYS_MATCHES = { 227, 2, 149444, 64368, 127485 };
+
+    private final String[] NUMERIC_RULES = {
+            "{\n" +
+                    "  \"geometry\": {\n" +
+                    "    \"type\": [ \"Polygon\" ],\n" +
+                    "    \"firstCoordinates\": {\n" +
+                    "      \"x\": [ { \"numeric\": [ \"=\", -122.42916360922355 ] } ]\n" +
+                    "    }\n" +
+                    "  }\n" +
+                    "}",
+            "{\n" +
+                    "  \"geometry\": {\n" +
+                    "    \"type\": [ \"MultiPolygon\" ],\n" +
+                    "    \"firstCoordinates\": {\n" +
+                    "      \"z\": [ { \"numeric\": [ \"=\", 0 ] } ]\n" +
+                    "    }\n" +
+                    "  }\n" +
+                    "}",
+            "{\n" +
+                    "  \"geometry\": {\n" +
+                    "    \"firstCoordinates\": {\n" +
+                    "      \"x\": [ { \"numeric\": [ \"<\", -122.41600944012424 ] } ]\n" +
+                    "    }\n" +
+                    "  }\n" +
+                    "}",
+            "{\n" +
+                    "  \"geometry\": {\n" +
+                    "    \"firstCoordinates\": {\n" +
+                    "      \"x\": [ { \"numeric\": [ \">\", -122.41600944012424 ] } ]\n" +
+                    "    }\n" +
+                    "  }\n" +
+                    "}",
+            "{\n" +
+                    "  \"geometry\": {\n" +
+                    "    \"firstCoordinates\": {\n" +
+                    "      \"x\": [ { \"numeric\": [ \">\",  -122.46471267081272, \"<\", -122.4063085128395 ] } ]\n" +
+                    "    }\n" +
+                    "  }\n" +
+                    "}"
+    };
+    private final int[] NUMERIC_MATCHES = { 8, 120, 148943, 64120, 127053 };
 
     private final String[] ANYTHING_BUT_RULES = {
       "{\n" +
@@ -476,10 +517,28 @@ public void CL2Benchmark() throws Exception {
 
         bm = new Benchmarker();
 
+        bm.addRules(COMPLEX_ARRAYS_RULES, COMPLEX_ARRAYS_MATCHES);
+        bm.run(citylots2);
+        System.out.println("COMPLEX_ARRAYS events/sec: " + String.format("%.1f", bm.getEPS()));
+
+        // skips complex arrays matchers because their slowness can hide improvements
+        // and regressions for other matchers. Remove this once we find ways to make
+        // arrays fast enough to others matchers
+        bm = new Benchmarker();
+
+        bm.addRules(NUMERIC_RULES, NUMERIC_MATCHES);
+        bm.addRules(EXACT_RULES, EXACT_MATCHES);
+        bm.addRules(PREFIX_RULES, PREFIX_MATCHES);
+        bm.addRules(ANYTHING_BUT_RULES, ANYTHING_BUT_MATCHES);
+        bm.run(citylots2);
+        System.out.println("PARTIAL_COMBO events/sec: " + String.format("%.1f", bm.getEPS()));
+
+        bm = new Benchmarker();
         bm.addRules(NUMERIC_RULES, NUMERIC_MATCHES);
         bm.addRules(EXACT_RULES, EXACT_MATCHES);
         bm.addRules(PREFIX_RULES, PREFIX_MATCHES);
         bm.addRules(ANYTHING_BUT_RULES, ANYTHING_BUT_MATCHES);
+        bm.addRules(COMPLEX_ARRAYS_RULES, COMPLEX_ARRAYS_MATCHES);
         bm.run(citylots2);
         System.out.println("COMBO events/sec: " + String.format("%.1f", bm.getEPS()));
     }