Henrik_er - 30 days ago 10

C# Question

I am exploring the fastest way to iterate through three sorted lists to find the position of the first item which is equal to or less than a double value. The lists contains two columns of doubles.

I have the two following **working** examples attached below, these are encompassed by a bigger while loop (which also modifies the currentPressure list changing the [0] value) value. But, considering the amount of rows (500,000+) being parsed by the bigger while loop, the code below is too slow (one iteration of the three while loops takes >20 ms).

"allPressures" contains all rows while currentPressure is modified by the remaining code. The while loops are used to align the time from the Flow, Rpm and Position lists to the Time in the pressure list.

In other words I am trying to find the quickest way to determine the x of

for instance

`FlowList[x].Time =< currentPressure[0].Time`

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!

Examples:

`for (int i = 0; i < allPressures.Count; i++)`

{

if (FlowList[i].Time >= currentPressure[0].Time)

{

fl = i;

break;

}

}

for (int i = 0; i < allPressures.Count; i++)

{

if (RpmList[i].Time >= currentPressure[0].Time)

{

rp = i;

break;

}

}

for (int i = 0; i < allPressures.Count; i++)

{

if (PositionList[i].Time >= currentPressure[0].Time)

{

bp = i;

break;

}

}

Using while loop:

`while (FlowList[fl].Time < currentPressure[0].Time)`

{

fl++;

}

while (RpmList[rp].Time < currentPressure[0].Time)

{

rp++;

}

while (PositionList[bp].Time < currentPressure[0].Time)

{

bp++;

}

Answer Source

The problem is that your are doing a linear search. This means that in the worst case scenario your are iterating over all the elements in your lists. This gives you a computational complexity of `O(3*n)`

where `n`

is the length of your lists and `3`

is the number of lists you are searching.

Since your lists are sorted you can use the much faster *binary search* which has a complexity of `O(log(n))`

and in your case `O(3*log(n))`

.

Luckily you don't have to implement it yourself, because .NET offers the helper method List.BinarySearch(). You will need the one that takes a custom comparer, because you want to compare `PressureData`

objects.

Since you are looking for the index of the closest value that's less than your search value, you'll have to use a little trick: when `BinarySearch()`

doesn't find a matching value it returns the index of the next element that is larger than the search value. From this it's easy to find the previous element that is smaller than the search value.

Here is an extension method the implements this:

```
public static int FindIndexOfFirstValueLessThan<T>(
this List<T> sortedList, T value, IComparer<T> comparer = null)
{
var index = sortedList.BinarySearch(value, comparer);
// The value was found in the list. Just return its index.
if (index >= 0)
return index;
// The value was not found and "~index" is the index of the
// next value greater than the search value.
index = ~index;
// There are values in the list less than the search value.
// Return the index of the closest one.
if (index > 0)
return index - 1;
// All values in the list are greater than the search value.
return -1;
}
```

Test it at https://dotnetfiddle.net/kLZsM5

Use this method with a comparer that understands `PressureData`

objects:

```
var pdc = Comparer<PressureData>.Create((x, y) => x.Time.CompareTo(y.Time));
var fl = FlowList.FindIndexOfFirstValueLessThan(currentPressure[0], pdc);
```

Here is a working example: https://dotnetfiddle.net/Dmgzsv