3 ms·

> on the server, there are java libraries that are much faster than protobufs Be careful not to back broad arguments with outlier benchmarks. In general, it i

> on the server, there are java libraries that are much faster than protobufs Be careful not to back broad arguments with outlier benchmarks. In general, it is plainly true that JSON is much more computationally difficult to encode and decode than Protobuf. Sure, if you compare a carefully micro-optimized JSON implementation against a less-optimized Protobuf implementation, it might win in some cases. That doesn't mean that Protobuf and JSON perform equivalently in general.

ec109685 7y ago
What is the reason not to use the micro optimized JSON implementation if parsing becomes your bottleneck?
- kentonv 7y ago
  I don't think I said that?
  - ec109685 7y ago
    My point is that json is always “fast enough”. Either you don’t care about parsing speed and can use what is most ergonomic or you do care and you’ll use an optimized library. You’ll never need to move to protobufs due to parsing speed.