Re: [jose] Performance of Canonical JSON

Thanks for the test data. Are you going to request a side meeting for Prague?

Bret 

Sent from my Commodore 128D

PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050

> On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:23 AM, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Since XML Canonicalization has a reputation of not only being brittle but also terribly slow, I tested JCS [1] with the following JSON file:
> {
>   "1": {"f": {"f": "hi","F": 5} ,"\n": 56.0},
>   "10": { },
>   "": "empty",
>   "a": { },
>   "111": [ {"e": "yes","E": "no" } ],
>   "A": { }
> }
> 
> Expected output: {"":"empty","1":{"\n":56,"f":{"F":5,"f":"hi"}},"10":{},"111":[{"E":"no","e":"yes"}],"A":{},"a":{}}
> 
> Since JCS only is a serialization concept (parsing is unaffected), I compared the execution speed of standard serialization versus canonicalized serialization.
> 
> Using https://www.npmjs.com/package/canonicalize the performance penalty was about 2.4 compared to JSON.stringify().
> Using my homegrown JSON tools written in Java having an integrated "canonicalize" serializer option the performance penalty was about 1.4
> 
> Anders
> 
> 1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rundgren-json-canonicalization-scheme-01
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> jose@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose