IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] RFC7952 JSON streaming decoding efficiency?

"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com> Thu, 28 February 2019 09:55 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90959130E94 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:55:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RXSuxVTSfZvX for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:54:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78B7A130E6B for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:54:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1914; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1551347698; x=1552557298; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=vKKQ5G02nfJvxplJ8C++lUkPG4rQsPEIao81iNcYPu0=; b=ZiCdhYMgMtiEY57tblZbePhZ+Pb8bIaXbLctS8Ye2dTrlKGxXK5/TnAw 2MoChPs535imIA5Svf0MQ3dyTFFXcC4BWAo0RAsRqJMaND1cTn2In0WrR L97ZI2s4r7xGxT9onF7osFaz6R2M2MBUtaz/mH3Lvik4KewGO3+wD+uj3 E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AEAAAir3dc/4oNJK1kGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEHAgEBAQGBUQUBAQEBCwGCBIFrJwqDfogai02CDZgggXsLAQGEbAIXg3kiNAkNAQMBAQMBAwJtKIVKAQEBAwEjEUoHBAIBCA4DBAEBAQICJgICAjAVCAgCBAESCIUDCKwTgS+KK4ELiz0XgUA/g241gUGDV4JzglcCihSCKJcuCQKLM4ctIZMcil2SFwIRFIEoHziBVnAVO4JskF1BMZEtgR8BAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,423,1544486400"; d="scan'208";a="240690478"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Feb 2019 09:54:57 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-008.cisco.com (xch-rcd-008.cisco.com [173.37.102.18]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x1S9svgn023855 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 28 Feb 2019 09:54:57 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-007.cisco.com (173.37.102.17) by XCH-RCD-008.cisco.com (173.37.102.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 03:54:57 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-007.cisco.com ([173.37.102.17]) by XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com ([173.37.102.17]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 03:54:57 -0600
From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
To: Robert Varga <nite@hq.sk>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] RFC7952 JSON streaming decoding efficiency?
Thread-Index: AQHUzuuJVNQCQ66ge0a+WQBULprZtqX08KGAgABrEoD//5yWEA==
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 09:54:57 +0000
Message-ID: <a34726cef6914b12a9bd63e8aa1f19a7@XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com>
References: <022ede1d-a195-21db-f0b6-0c299a935f42@hq.sk> <822cb25f1b894be9953a49ae12c91df9@XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com> <e3c0f277-9706-3b20-f4ac-23d926e5cfe6@hq.sk>
In-Reply-To: <e3c0f277-9706-3b20-f4ac-23d926e5cfe6@hq.sk>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.63.23.61]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.18, xch-rcd-008.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-5.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/op4zAKMtZ1WSIXwOUSP_qjUIzK4>
Subject: Re: [netmod] RFC7952 JSON streaming decoding efficiency?
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 09:55:01 -0000

Broadly sounds like a reasonable idea to me, but I suspect that others may argue that you are just creating a new JSON like language.

If we were to investigate anything like this, then it might also be a good idea to consider the ordering of list keys within a list entry (i.e. put them first).

Thanks,
Rob


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Varga <nite@hq.sk> 
Sent: 28 February 2019 09:46
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] RFC7952 JSON streaming decoding efficiency?

On 28/02/2019 10:29, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:
> Hi Robert,

Hey Rob,

> Isn't this just a limitation of JSON, in that the elements in an object are unordered (RFC 8259)?

Yes, but I believe this is object semantics leaking to on-wire format:
while a JSON object is inherently unordered, when emitting object to the wire, implementations can choose to order the pairs to make receiver-side processing more efficient.

I wonder if it would be of value to communicate such assumptions out of band, like separate content-types. In case of RFC7952 the following hints would be useful:
- the document does not contain metadata (i.e. plain RFC7951)
- "@" occurs as a first element in an object or not at all
- "@foo" occurs immediately after "foo" or not at all

This, of course, would be purely optional optimization...

Regards,
Robert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email