Comments on: JSON Benchmarking: Beating a Dead Horse

By: Performance web » Archive du blog » JSON ?

Performance web » Archive du blog » JSON ? — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:17:51 +0000

[...] D’autres que moi ont fait des tests. Un premier test trouve XML+dom deux fois plus rapide que JSON+eval. Dave Johnson des graphiques intÃ©ressants en fonction du nombre d’Ã©lÃ©ments dans le jeu de donnÃ©es. Du plus rapide au plus lent sous Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 il trouve XML+xslt, XML+dom et enfin JSON+eval. Sous Firefox 1.5 c’est JSON+eval qui est plus rapide mais la diffÃ©rence est moitiÃ© moins importante. En considÃ©rant un marchÃ© franÃ§ais de 25% de Firefox, JSON+eval est en moyenne nettement plus lent. [...]

By: tworzenie stron internetowych

tworzenie stron internetowych — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:29:42 +0000

Many thanks for interesting performance charts. Good piece of work!

By: Meble

Meble — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 12:51:33 +0000

Great, looking forward to seeing it. I ended up with a straight javascript array for now

By: Katalog Stron

Katalog Stron — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:24:42 +0000

Good diagrams..

By: Mark Holton

Mark Holton — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:17:42 +0000

Can you run an update to the same test using E4X in Firefox? Would be very interested to see those results plotted. cheers-

By: Dave Johnson » Blog Archive » Injected JavaScript Object Notation (JSONP)

Sun, 09 Apr 2006 19:20:51 +0000

[...] I had a few comments on one of my previous posts from Brad Neuberg and Will (no link for him). Brad suggested using script injection rather than XHR + eval() to instantiate JavaScript objects as a way of getting around the poor performance that Will was having with his application (he was creating thousands of objects using eval(jsonString) and it was apparently grinding to a halt). [...]

By: Dave Johnson

Dave Johnson — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 17:18:53 +0000

Hi Tom, I looked into the JSON.parse() previously and it was _really_ slow. The latest version of that library, however, seems to just apply some RegEx or something and I have not really tested it out. Any ideas about it’s performance?

By: Tom Stewart

Tom Stewart — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 17:17:53 +0000

Dave, Why not run your JSON tests using JSON.parse() instead of eval()?

By: Dave Johnson

Dave Johnson — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 17:17:04 +0000

Heya Erik – I am trying to find some time to put the code out there … I have just been making it a bit more readable in hopes of releasing it for everyone to use.

“highly suspicious”??? Well fair enough since I have not released the entire code but you can try the bits that I have shown above and you will likely see similar results.

The main thing I have noticed is that JavaScript in IE is pretty darn slow – so if you are targeting the general public or many corporations then this can be a real bottleneck. Having said that, all this is pretty moot when it comes to looking at the amount of time it takes to actually set the innerHTML of a DOM node.

By: Erik Arvidsson

Erik Arvidsson — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 17:15:40 +0000

Do you have the js files you used to benchmark this available somewhere? I find it highly suspicious that XML+XSLT should be faster than JSON+ESTE(1) (or some other highly optimized template engine.

(1) http://erik.eae.net/archives/2005/05/27/01.03.26/