On 20-02-05 10:17:18, Witek Bedyk wrote:
Hi,
we're using ujson in Monasca for serialization all over the place. While changing it to any other alternative is probably a drop-in replacement, we have in the past chosen to use ujson because of better performance. It is of great importance, in particular in persister. Current alternatives include orjson [1] and rapidjson [2]. We're going to measure which of them works best for our use case and how much faster they are compared to standard library module.
Assuming there is a significant performance benefit, is there any preference from requirements team which one to include in global requirements? I haven't seen any distro packages for any of them.
[1] https://pypi.org/project/orjson/ [2] https://pypi.org/project/python-rapidjson/
Best greetings Witek
On 1/31/20 9:34 AM, Radosław Piliszek wrote:
This is a spinoff discussion of [1] to attract more people.
As the subject goes, the situation of ujson is bad. Still, monasca and gnocchi (both server and client) seem to be using it which may break depending on compiler. The original issue is that the released version of ujson is in non-spec-conforming C which may break randomly based on used compiler and linker. There has been no release of ujson for more than 4 years.
Based on general project activity, Monasca is probably able to fix it but Gnocchi not so surely...
[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-January/thread.h...
-yoctozepto
orjson supports CPython 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9. It distributes wheels for Linux, macOS, and Windows. The manylinux1 wheel differs from PEP 513 in requiring glibc 2.18, released 2013, or later. orjson does not support PyPy. Given the above (I think we still need to support py35 at least) I'm not sure we can use it. Though it is my preferred other than that... (faster than ujson, more updates (last release yesterday), etc) -- Matthew Thode