You might want to check the date of the original message from Carsten :-). regards,
Karl On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ian Boston <[email protected]> wrote: > 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] >> > >> >> -- Karl Pauls [email protected]
