Understanding @ngrx/component-store selector debouncing
@ngrx/component-store selectors have a debounce option that lets the state 'settle' before emitting. In this article we will demonstrate what this means in practice before walking through the code that makes this possible.

Understanding @ngrx/component-store selector debouncing
@ngrx/component-store selectors have a debounce option that lets the state 'settle' before emitting. In this article we will demonstrate what this means in practice before walking through the code that makes this possible.


@ngrx/component-store selectors have a debounce
option that lets the state 'settle' before emitting. In this article we will demonstrate what this means in practice before walking through the code that makes this possible.
NgRx Component StoreLink to this section
I have started using @ngrx/component-store to manage component state in my applications and I am loving it! In this post I am not going to explain how or why to use component-store. But if you want to know more, check out this video by Alex Okrushko.
Debounce SelectorsLink to this section
In this post I want to take a closer look at the {debounce}
config option for the select method. Here is what the docs say about debouncing.
Selectors are synchronous by default, meaning that they emit the value immediately when subscribed to, and on every state change. Sometimes the preferred behavior would be to wait (or debounce) until the state "settles" (meaning all the changes within the current microtask occur) and only then emit the final value. In many cases, this would be the most performant way to read data from the ComponentStore, however its behavior might be surprising sometimes, as it won't emit a value until later on. This makes it harder to test such selectors.
At first I did not understand what this meant, so I built an example in Stackblitz to see what difference the flag made to a selector.
Demo SetupLink to this section
We setup the component store as part of the AppComponent with a boolean toggle state.
<>Copyinterface AppCompState { toggle: boolean; }
We then create two selectors on this toggle, one which we debounce and the other we don't.
<>Copyupdate$ = this.select((s) => s.toggle, { debounce: false }); updateDebounced$ = this.select((s) => s.toggle, { debounce: true });
As the docs speak about selectors being synchronous, I have created two methods that watch the toggle state and then toggle it back. It's a bit like a naughty child turning the TV back on as soon as you turn it off!
The important difference is that we include a delay(0)
in the second toggler to make the toggleState
call asynchronous.
<>Copy// Set up synchronous auto toggle back this.select((s) => s.toggle) .pipe(take(1)) .subscribe(() => this.toggleState()); // Set up asynchronous auto toggle back using delay(0) this.select((s) => s.toggle) .pipe(delay(0), take(1)) .subscribe(() => this.toggleState());
We trigger these actions by two different buttons in the demo app.
Synchronous UpdatesLink to this section
When we click on Update Sync only the selector with debounce: false
emits any values. Without debouncing the selector emits every changed toggle value.


However, the selector that is debouncing emits no change. Why is this? The value of the toggle starts as true, gets set to false before being set back to true. This all happens synchronously, (in the same microtask) and is debounced by the debounceSync
function. At the end of the microtask the value is still true and the selector does not emit. There is a distintUntilChanged
in the select method that ensures this.
Asynchronous UpdatesLink to this section
When we click on Update Async both selectors now emit values. The debounceSync
function, as the name suggests, only debounces synchronous updates. Now the debounced selector emits every toggle change as each occurs in a different microtask.


What does this all mean?Link to this section
PerformanceLink to this section
As the docs suggest using debounce: true
can improve the performance of your app as the selectors will only emit new values at the end of a microtask. In our demo app this means the selector would not emit at all resulting in no further actions / re-rendering. Debouncing avoids unnecessary work.
ConsistencyLink to this section
State emitted by a debounced selector may be more consistent or logically correct. For example, if the selector relies on multiple properties, which are interdependent, then we want them to have reached a valid state before the selector emits. Setting {debounce:true}
ensures we do not emit all the intermediary values which could originate from a temporary 'invalid state'.
The debounceSync() codeLink to this section
The code is located here in NgRx and can also be found in rxjs-etc where it was originally created by Nicholas Jamieson. As it is published with the MIT license and all conditions are fulfilled by NgRx, they are able to avoid having an extra dependency but still benefit from this feature.
Selector DebouncingLink to this section
Inside the select method of component-store is the following line of code. This takes our debounce config value and either adds the debounceSync()
operator or returns the original source with no change.
<>Copythis.stateSubject$.pipe( config.debounce ? debounceSync() : (source$) => source$, map(projector) );
Below is the code for debounceSync. When I first looked at this I had no idea what was going on! So I reached for our trusty friend console.log
and started experimenting in Stackblitz. You too can try this here.
<>Copyexport function debounceSync<T>(): MonoTypeOperatorFunction<T> { return source => new Observable<T>(observer => { let actionSubscription: Subscription | undefined; let actionValue: T | undefined; const rootSubscription = new Subscription(); rootSubscription.add( source.subscribe({ complete: () => { console.log("COMPLETE", { actionSubscription, actionValue }); if (actionSubscription) { observer.next(actionValue); } observer.complete(); }, error: error => { console.log("ERROR", { actionSubscription }); observer.error(error); }, next: value => { console.log("NEXT", { actionSubscription, value }); actionValue = value; if (!actionSubscription) { actionSubscription = asapScheduler.schedule(() => { console.log("ASAP", { actionSubscription, actionValue }); observer.next(actionValue); actionSubscription = undefined; }); rootSubscription.add(actionSubscription); } } }) ); return rootSubscription; }); }
Demo SetupLink to this section
To run the code I setup two streams. One uses interval
to be asynchronous and the other uses from
to run synchronously.
<>Copyconsole.warn("Before interval"); interval(1).pipe( debounceSync(), take(3) ).subscribe(val => console.log("interval", val)); console.warn("Before from"); from([10, 20, 30]).pipe( debounceSync() ).subscribe(val => console.log("fromArray", val)); console.warn("After From");
This along with the logging I added into the debounceSync()
function gives the following output.


The first thing to notice is that the interval
code does not appear between the "Before interval" and "Before from". This is because this interval code is running asynchronously. What's more interesting is that it appears right at the end, even after our fromArray
code! This demonstrates how synchronous code is executed before asynchronous and that Observables can run synchronously.
This behaviour comes down to the Event Loop. If you are not familiar with the Event loop, it would be worth reading this fantastic article to learn more before carrying on. (It even has animations to demonstrate it!)
The DifferencesLink to this section
If we compare the two outputs, we get an idea of what the code is doing. On the left we have the synchronous from
stream and on the right the asynchronous interval
stream.


In both cases the first value comes in, and as the actionSubscription
is undefined, it creates one. This actionSubscription
uses the asapScheduler
to register its call-back method.
asapScheduler: Perform task as fast as it can be performed asynchronously
In the call-back it passes the value to the next observer in the chain and also clears the current actionSubscription
.
<>Copynext: value => { console.log("NEXT", { actionSubscription, value }); actionValue = value; if (!actionSubscription) { actionSubscription = asapScheduler.schedule(() => { console.log("ASAP", { actionSubscription, actionValue }); observer.next(actionValue); actionSubscription = undefined; }); rootSubscription.add(actionSubscription); } }
SynchronousLink to this section
With a fully synchronous event stream the actionSubscription
never gets to fire. This is because all the synchronous events are on the call stack and these must be executed before the asapScheduler
can run. So any new values just update the internal actionValue
without being passed to the next observer.
As we are using the from
operator it completes synchronously after the 3 values are emitted and before the asapScheduler
has the chance to run. This is why the complete
method checks for the existence of an outstanding actionSubscription
and if it is defined, it then emits the current actionValue
to the observer before completing. Without this check no values would be emitted.
<>Copycomplete: () => { if (actionSubscription) { observer.next(actionValue); } observer.complete(); },
Note with the synchronous code only the last value actually gets emitted. This is why this function is called debounceSync
because it debounces synchronous events.
AsynchronousLink to this section
With the asynchronous events we see that every value gets emitted via the actionSubscription
. This is because the asapScheduler
will get the opportunity to run between the asynchronous interval
events. Each time the asapScheuler
fires the current actionSubscription
is cleared. So the next value will also setup a new actionSubscription
to enable that to be emitted via the call-back too.
Summary
The debounceSync()
operator works by recording each new event in a local variable actionValue
which will only be emitted when the observable completes or after the call stack has been cleared (all synchronous events have completed). The asynchronous call-back uses the asapScheduler
to keep any introduced delay to a minimum.
After writing this article the following section in the docs makes a lot more sense to me.
Sometimes the preferred behaviour would be to wait (or debounce) until the state "settles" (meaning all the changes within the current microtask occur) and only then emit the final value.
Multiple SelectorsLink to this section
At this point it is worth noting that as long as all the events are synchronous you may find that debouncing enables feedback loops in selectors to stabilize before emitting. Our example has not covered this use case, but it is the main advantage of debouncing selectors as I see it.
Alternative ImplementationLink to this section
This function is equivalent to using the debounceTime
operator with a delay value of 0 setup with the asapScheduler
.
<>CopydebounceTime(0, asapScheduler)
Alex Okrushko, from the NgRx core team, said that this was the first thought for synchronous debouncing however this has the side effect of creating extra timers that are not required for this specific behaviour. Nicholas Jamieson suggested to use this custom operator, debounceSync
which he created to ensure the best possible performance for the NgRx Component Store.
Further ReadingLink to this section
I learnt a lot about this feature from the NgRx Discord channel which you should definitely join if you have not already!
We have seen how component store is benefitting from debouncing selectors but what if you could apply the same kind of debouncing to your entire Angular app? This is exactly the kind of work that is happening right now with event coalescing and the ramifications could be huge for application performance.
Comments (0)
Be the first to leave a comment
About the author

Stephen is a Senior Engineer at AG Grid building out the Javascript grid. When not coding you will find him out and about with his four little explorers.

About the author
Stephen Cooper
Stephen is a Senior Engineer at AG Grid building out the Javascript grid. When not coding you will find him out and about with his four little explorers.
About the author

Stephen is a Senior Engineer at AG Grid building out the Javascript grid. When not coding you will find him out and about with his four little explorers.