when we originally switched to it in gnocchi[1], a former colleague and i were benchmarking its performance but i seemed to have removed my benchmarks when i updated my computer. i would say http://artem.krylysov.com/blog/2015/09/29/benchmark-python-json- libraries/ is an accurate representation. for our use case, we got more than than the 2x-10x improvement.
i would argue we probably don't need ujson in aodh (we merged it recently so i imagine we could just revert that if required). for ceilometer, we use it for gnocchi publisher and http publisher. - the gnocchi publisher we arguably don't need it as it's only used in the event workflow (which is less frequent). - the http publisher, well it's used for everything. so basically it's a matter of do we care to slow down http publisher that in theory isn't broken. i don't use the http publisher so i'm indifferent and i don't know how much of the workflow is serialisation time. tl;dr if there is a patch to remove ujson from aodh, i'll +A. for ceilometer, i'm indifferent and will +A depending on feedback. [1] https://github.com/gnocchixyz/gnocchi/commit/e7d8fafa77b0cef20b653020425c15be76e389b5 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1737989 Title: [MIR] ujson? To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/aodh/+bug/1737989/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
