大家都知道JSON是一个与平台无关的一种数据格式，所以它也得到来广大编程者的认可，在目前各种JSON格式的第三方LIB都层出不穷，如雨后春生一样，面对这些，我们到底取怎么选择呢，首先，我们来比对一下目前其相关的JSON解析库的性能：
Json BecnhMark
Bench Protole
Those test are generate by parrsing 50.000 pre-build json string.
to minimise gc effect on bench, a new VM is lanched for each test.
New Tests
The bench run on an intel P9700 CPU, using sun JVM 1.6.22 64bit + SSD each bench had been lunch 10 times, the best time had been keeped.
BenchMark run directly after the JVM start
update on 30 May
JsonIJ version is now 0.2.7
Json-smart is now 1.0.6.3
argo is now 2.8
BenchMark : bench
Result display as % of the fastest API. Lower is better, for example 400% means that JSon-smart is 4 times faster.
Test Sojo Argo json-lib JsonMe org.json json-Simple Jackson StringTree JsonIJ Json-fast Json-Smart
mixte 1 129 % 822 % 834 % 395 % 437 % 324 % 269 % 287 % 205 % 134 % 100 %
text 1 628 % 965 % 879 % 363 % 610 % 434 % 419 % 369 % 271 % 174 % 100 %
int 1 300 % 966 % 718 % 359 % 521 % 281 % 286 % 293 % 224 % 118 % 100 %
unicode 1 177 % 674 % 549 % 218 % 445 % 351 % 315 % 216 % 256 % 147 % 100 %
boolean 1 285 % 724 % 809 % 391 % 498 % 332 % 291 % 210 % 228 % 138 % 100 %
float 1 145 % 794 % 711 % 1 152 % 450 % 243 % 265 % 272 % 201 % 126 % 100 %
TOTAL 1 251 % 818 % 739 % 511 % 484 % 319 % 300 % 272 % 228 % 137 % 100 %
BenchMark with preload classes
Not updated yet
preloading class look to have no significant effect, due to SSD usage.
Test JsonIJ Sojo Argo json-lib org.json JsonMe json-Simple Jackson StringTree Json-fast Json-Smart
mixte 1 302 % 1 150 % 804 % 858 % 452 % 365 % 323 % 258 % 275 % 133 % 100 %
text 1 772 % 1 492 % 914 % 782 % 582 % 332 % 409 % 355 % 332 % 159 % 100 %
int 1 266 % 1 345 % 907 % 723 % 447 % 290 % 279 % 250 % 304 % 118 % 100 %
unicode N/A 1 185 % 674 % 538 % 448 % 216 % 358 % 280 % 216 % 135 % 100 %
boolean 1 401 % 1 168 % 680 % 717 % 459 % 283 % 300 % 254 % 192 % 129 % 100 %
float 1 024 % 1 129 % 740 % 707 % 384 % 1 043 % 247 % 242 % 280 % 125 % 100 %
TOTAL N/A 1 230 % 781 % 717 % 454 % 452 % 314 % 269 % 266 % 132 % 100 %
Comment by tsaloranta@gmail.com, May 16, 2011
Where is the source? Are you warming up GC (if not, this test is totally meaningless)? What kind of JSON are you parsing?
Comment by project member uriel.chemouni, May 16, 2011
Sources are available now: http://json-smart.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/bench/
Json test string generator: http://json-smart.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/bench/src/net/minidev/bench/json/TestData.java
a new JVM is started for each test, GC is never explicitely called.
Comment by tsaloranta@gmail.com, May 19, 2011
Whops, meant JVM warmed up, not GC. :-)
It is necessary to run code to be tested for couple of seconds first on new JVM, before taking measurements; otherwise test is about how fast JVM can load (and possibly inline) bytecode.
Comment by project member uriel.chemouni, May 23, 2011
Warmed up test is now available.
Comment by Programm...@gmail.com, Jun 22, 2011
Using the jvm-serializers (https://github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers/wiki) test suite, I get significantly different results. When testing with about 736 bytes of JSON input (in java.lang.String format), my results show the different APIs performing in the following order, ranked from fastest to slowest.
ser deser total
json/jackson-databind-strings 6034 8085 14209
json/fastjson-databind 5837 8924 14826
json/json-smart/manual/tree 13104 9644 23182
json/org.json/manual/tree 16404 20039 36526
json/json.simple/manual/tree 15971 21954 38170
json/jsonij-manual/tree 75124 16888 92275
json/argo-manual/tree-builders 176566 51439 228847
json/json-lib-databind 73202 169966 243474
Using the json-smart performance as the baseline, here are the same numbers as percentages (rounded to the nearest whole number).
ser deser total
json/jackson-databind-strings 46% 84% 61%
json/fastjson-databind 45% 93% 64%
json/json-smart/manual/tree 100% 100% 100%
json/org.json/manual/tree 125% 208% 158%
json/json.simple/manual/tree 122% 228% 165%
json/jsonij-manual/tree 573% 175% 398%
json/argo-manual/tree-builders 1347% 533% 987%
json/json-lib-databind 559% 1762% 1050%
These results place the performance of some of the different APIs in significantly different orders, and some with significantly different percentages.
As time permits, I'll try to figure out what the cause of the different results is.
(I have no affiliation with any of these projects, or with any other JSON processing project.)
