perf: add query parameter to benchmark

[anonrig]

Referencing #1673, this pull request adds query as a parameter to benchmarks.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Base: 94.74% // Head: 95.47% // Increases project coverage by +0.72% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (e994ebf) compared to base (7c93a8d).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1676      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.74%   95.47%   +0.72%     
==========================================
  Files          53       39      -14     
  Lines        4892     2828    -2064     
==========================================
- Hits         4635     2700    -1935     
+ Misses        257      128     -129     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
index.js	80.00% <0.00%> (-20.00%)	⬇️
lib/core/util.js	89.24% <0.00%> (-8.87%)	⬇️
lib/api/readable.js	82.75% <0.00%> (-8.63%)	⬇️
lib/handler/RedirectHandler.js	87.34% <0.00%> (-7.60%)	⬇️
lib/proxy-agent.js	87.67% <0.00%> (-5.48%)	⬇️
lib/mock/mock-utils.js	95.13% <0.00%> (-4.87%)	⬇️
lib/core/request.js	95.65% <0.00%> (-4.35%)	⬇️
lib/core/connect.js	98.27% <0.00%> (-1.73%)	⬇️
lib/fetch/global.js
lib/fetch/formdata.js
... and 12 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[ronag]

Not sure this is very indicative for the most common use cases...

[anonrig]

Thank you for the comment @ronag. This is the worst-case scenario, since URL and node:querystring supports all parameters in this object, but I'm happy to adjust it if you have any suggestions.

[anonrig]

Here are the benchmark inputs from the Node repository: https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/benchmark/querystring/querystring-stringify.js#L11

[ronag]

I think we should optimize for most common case rather than worst case. I'm not sure what that is but I'm pretty sure e.g. BigInt is quite unusual...

[anonrig]

I think we should optimize for most common case rather than worst case. I'm not sure what that is but I'm pretty sure e.g. BigInt is quite unusual...

That seems reasonable. I'll remove it, and update the pull-request.