4 ms·
Interesting. I will be curious to see how it stacks up against Jackson Smile, both in terms of features and performance. Since it appears to support both polymo
by knutwannheden 3y ago
Interesting. I will be curious to see how it stacks up against Jackson Smile, both in terms of features and performance. Since it appears to support both polymorphism and back-references, it looks like it already has some advanced features.
- chaokunyang 3y agoYeah, you are right. Fury supports polymorphism and circular/shared references, which are not supported by json/jackson. I did a benchmark with jackson before, here are the results: 1) Fury is 41.6x faster than jackson for Struct serialization 2) Fury is 65.6x faster than jackson for Struct deserialization 3) Fury is 9.4x faster than jackson for MediaContent serialization 4) Fury is 9.6x faster than jackson for MediaContent deserialization see https://github.com/chaokunyang/fury-benchmarks https://github.com/chaokunyang/fury-benchmarks for detailed benchmark code.
- chaokunyang 3y agoAnother issue about json is that json is not storage efficient. For a float 0.3333333333333335, json needs 18 bytes, but fury needs only 4 bytes.