Did anyone consider gson? Iirc it dosnt have dependencies, is similar in nature to Json.org and is the same or quicker.
Best regards Ian On 3 Apr 2017 10:02 am, "Stefan Seifert" <[email protected]> wrote: > my opinion about jackson: > > pro: > - it's really very mature and proven in lots of projects > - in json performance rankings it's most times with the best ones > - it can be deployed in OSGi easily and uses semantic versioning > - i've used it in several projects and had no problems > > contra: > - it's quite fat from a deployment perspective, it think at least two > bundles are required (core+databind) making ~1.5 MB only for JSON > parsing/writing > - it does not implement javax.json interface, and does not seem to plan to > do this any time soon - we cannot decide to switch to another > implementation later > - we already invested a good deal of time in javax.json migration > > i'm wondering if the reason of the performance degradation is: > a) poor performance in the johnzon impl itself > b) poor usage of the javax.json API on our side in the GET servlet > c) design problems with the javax.json interface which makes it > problematic to get good performance > > in performance ranking to be found on the internet johnzon was not tested > in most times because it is quite new. i'm not sure how much time the > johnzon community has invested in performance optimization yet, and if > improvements are expected here any time soon (our patch for making the > deployment OSGi compatible is still pending due to lack of time for > reviewing/testing it). > > stefan > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:[email protected]] > >Sent: Saturday, April 1, 2017 8:55 AM > >To: Sling Developers > >Subject: [JSON] Performance problems with new json library > > > >Hi, > > > >as you all know we had to replace the usage of the org.json library due > >to it's license (see SLING-6679). We decided to go with Apache Johnzon > >as the replacement. > > > >Now as most of the work is done I did some performance testing, mainly > >of the json get servlet, rendering a 2k json response requested by 50 > >clients in parallel. Unfortunately it seems that this library is causing > >a significant performance degradation. I noticed json responses to be > >between 15% and 20% slower. I can't explain what is causing this as all > >we do is simply write out json. > > > >So I went ahead and did a quick test by replacing johnson with jackson > >and interestingly, this one is in the same range as org.json, slightly > >faster even. > > > >Given this, I seriously think we should not use johnson but switch to > >jackson. As we have identified all the places, replacing is not one of > >the nicest tasks, but it should be doable within a short time frame. > > > >WDYT? > > > >Regards > >Carsten > >-- > >Carsten Ziegeler > >Adobe Research Switzerland > >[email protected] > > > >
