[PERF] Improve performance of duplicate ID validator

[steve-marmalade]

Description of changes

Summarize the changes made by this PR.

• Improvements & Bug fixes
  • Improves the performance of the duplicate ID validator. I noticed this while trying to add > 100k records to a collection. I had duplicates in my ID array (which I didn't know at the time), and I eventually terminated the operation because it was taking so long. I happened to notice in the traceback that it was stuck in the validate_ids function, which looks like it might be O(N^2).
  • This PR currently changes just the implementation. That said, it would be easy to display only the e.g. top 10 most common dupes (so as to avoid printing over 1k IDs to console output, as happened in my case 🙃 ). Let me know if you would prefer that.

Test plan

How are these changes tested?

1. I tested the implementation within a Jupyter notebook on the same list of IDs that I had passed to collection.add, and it isolated the dupes in about half a second.
   

2. I pip installed this branch, tried to add the same items to the collection, and confirmed that I received the error message without a long delay.

Documentation Changes

Are all docstrings for user-facing APIs updated if required? Do we need to make documentation changes in the docs repository? No docstrings or documentation changes are needed.

[github-actions]

Reviewer Checklist

Please leverage this checklist to ensure your code review is thorough before approving

Testing, Bugs, Errors, Logs, Documentation

• Can you think of any use case in which the code does not behave as intended? Have they been tested?
• Can you think of any inputs or external events that could break the code? Is user input validated and safe? Have they been tested?
• If appropriate, are there adequate property based tests?
• If appropriate, are there adequate unit tests?
• Should any logging, debugging, tracing information be added or removed?
• Are error messages user-friendly?
• Have all documentation changes needed been made?
• Have all non-obvious changes been commented?

System Compatibility

• Are there any potential impacts on other parts of the system or backward compatibility?
• Does this change intersect with any items on our roadmap, and if so, is there a plan for fitting them together?

Quality

• Is this code of a unexpectedly high quality (Readbility, Modularity, Intuitiveness)

[HammadB]

Thank you for doing this! Let's change the error message to just enumerate the first 10 duplicates as you suggested and then add ellipsis to truncate so that we aren't dumping potentially so many ids as to overload the console. Also we can do this in one pass if we store the call to set(), as opposed to the currently 3 passes - set(), Counter() and dups = [...]

[HammadB]

Thanks for this! Can you make the suggested changes?

[HammadB]

Hi @steve-marmalade would you prefer if I just went ahead and made those changes?

[steve-marmalade]

Hi @steve-marmalade would you prefer if I just went ahead and made those changes?

@HammadB apologies for the delay, will update shortly.

[steve-marmalade]

@HammadB this is ready for another look 🙏

[HammadB]

Amazing thank you!

[steve-marmalade]

@HammadB please let me know if the test failure is due to my changes, or if there's anything you need from me to address it. On a cursory look, it doesn't appear related to what I've done in this PR.

[HammadB]

@steve-marmalade no worries, thats a flaky test I patched in a subsequent PR that has yet to land. Issue #927