Background
I have a side project called “comics.” It’s a simple HTTP server that serves comics so I can access them anywhere. According to the Chrome documentation, to make images lazy-loaded, the server needs to run an initial scan and retrieve the dimensions of images when it starts. However, its performance is poor on my NAS, which uses HDD drives.
Initially, I used the image-rs library, which I found widely recommended online.
Benchmark
After adding tracing to my code, I discovered that retrieving image dimensions during the initial scan took most of the time, which makes sense since it’s the server’s main task during this phase. However, I noticed the server’s performance varies with the size of the images. Digging deeper, I found that the performance of image-rs degrades as image size increases. Here’s a code snippet that shows this issue:
# Cargo.toml
[package]
name = "a"
version = "0.1.0"
edition = "2021"
[dependencies]
image = { version = "0.25.1", default-features = false, features = ["jpeg"] }
// src/main.rs
use image::GenericImageView;
use std::env;
fn main() {
let args: Vec<String> = env::args().collect();
let image_path = args.get(1).expect("exepct file path");
let img = image::open(image_path).expect("failed to open image");
let (width, height) = img.dimensions();
println!("{}x{}", width, height);
}
We can download sample images from Lorem Picsum using the following curl command:
curl -L https://picsum.photos/100/100 > 100.jpg
curl -L https://picsum.photos/1000/1000 > 1000.jpg
Then, benchmark image-rs with hyperfine:
$ cargo build --release # build the example with release profile
$ inxi -b # show my CPU
...
CPU: Info: 6-Core AMD Ryzen 5 5600X [MT MCP] speed: 3693 MHz
...
$ hyperfine './target/release/a 100.jpg' './target/release/a 1000.jpg'
Here are the results:
Command | Mean [µs] | Min [µs] | Max [µs] | Relative |
---|---|---|---|---|
./target/release/a 100.jpg | 518.7 ± 275.3 | 148.2 | 3543.7 | 1.00 |
./target/release/a 1000.jpg | 6415.5 ± 485.1 | 5479.3 | 7775.7 | 12.37 ± 6.63 |
But I needed more proof, so I looked into the source code of image-rs and found that it loads the entire image into memory to fetch the dimensions.
let mut r = r;
r.read_to_end(&mut input)?; // 👈
let mut decoder = zune_jpeg::JpegDecoder::new(input.as_slice());
decoder.decode_headers().map_err(ImageError::from_jpeg)?;
let (width, height) = decoder.dimensions().unwrap();
To be fair, image-rs is a feature-rich library, but it doesn’t meet my performance expectations. So, I searched further and found an interesting topic on Stack Overflow:
Get Image size WITHOUT loading image into memory
This led me to a Rust library called imsz-rs. I ran a simple benchmark comparing image-rs and imsz, and the performance of imsz remained consistent even with larger images:
# Cargo.toml
[package]
name = "b"
version = "0.1.0"
edition = "2021"
[dependencies]
imsz = "0.3.1"
use std::env;
fn main() {
let args: Vec<String> = env::args().collect();
let image_path = args.get(1).expect("exepct file path");
let info = imsz::imsz_from_path(image_path).expect("failed to get dimensions");
println!("{}x{}", info.width, info.height);
}
Command | Mean [µs] | Min [µs] | Max [µs] | Relative |
---|---|---|---|---|
./target/release/b 100.jpg | 504.7 ± 164.9 | 237.6 | 1584.8 | 1.00 |
./target/release/b 1000.jpg | 515.3 ± 162.0 | 258.2 | 1381.0 | 1.02 ± 0.46 |
As the results show, imsz performs consistently regardless of the image size.
I tried to understand how imsz gets the dimensions of an image, but it looks like I need to know about the JPEG format. To me, it just seems like looking for and reading specific bytes. All I can do is appreciate the maintainer’s work.
Results
Here are the results of benchmarking image-rs and imsz:
Command | Mean [ms] | Min [ms] | Max [ms] | Relative |
---|---|---|---|---|
./a/target/release/a 1000.jpg | 6.8 ± 0.5 | 5.9 | 9.1 | 14.08 ± 4.67 |
./b/target/release/b 1000.jpg | 0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.2 | 1.2 | 1.00 |
As expected, imsz outperforms image-rs.
As the results show, no matter how big the image is, imsz performs consistently. Finally, I replaced image-rs with imsz and saw a 56% performance improvement on my NAS.
Closing Words
In conclusion, it’s always rewarding to dig deeper to improve performance. By switching from image-rs to imsz, I achieved a significant performance boost. Exploring and understanding the underlying code can lead to substantial improvements.