[Flutter] Async methods working significantly slower than the Sync methods. about objectbox-dart

[vamsikrishnacse]

Hi @Destanci, i would like to work on this task!
is this the work flow you are expecting from async method to do?

getAll() method called
Stopwatch started
getStore() awaited
[STOPWATCH] Store get time: X milliseconds
getAllAsync() awaited
[STOPWATCH] Database result time: Y milliseconds
getAll() method completed

[huseyin-kucuksahin]

method is just fine with sync or async doesnt really matters. My question is, is there anything wrong with the async functions? no? then why it tooks 100times more time to get the data with async?

[vamsikrishnacse]

When i see the code Async the code line var entities = await store.box().getAllAsync(); is using await function which will wait until it gets the result and i thing you are using getall() function in async code pls check. I may be wrong!
this may be a solution for the entities variable await usage:

var entitiesFuture = store.box<TEntity>().getAllAsync();

// Perform other tasks while waiting for getAllAsync to complete.

// Now, await the result of getAllAsync when needed.
var entities = await entitiesFuture;

[huseyin-kucuksahin]

nah, measured the time outside of the function too. changing the position of awaiting does not make sense at all. since if you didnt start to await that Future wont start working right?. Also nothing else to do between that 2 lines.

[greenrobot-team]

@Destanci As documented, the async methods spawn a worker isolate to complete the box operation. That naturally takes some more time than directly calling the database API.

However, 2 seconds vs. 2 microseconds seem rather long. As you mentioned it, did you test in release mode? This is where we also measure performance and did not find that much of a penalty for using the async variants.

Note: @vamsikrishnacse is not associated with ObjectBox. I've also hidden the comments of that discussion.

[github-actions]

Without additional information, we are unfortunately not sure how to resolve this issue. Therefore this issue has been automatically closed. Feel free to comment with additional details and we can re-open this issue.