Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upgrade fastjson1.x to fastjson2.x to optimize json serialization and deserialization performance #4440

Closed
wanweiqiangintel opened this issue Jun 9, 2022 · 7 comments · May be fixed by #6583

Comments

@wanweiqiangintel
Copy link

fastjson2 is releasedhttps://github.com/alibaba/fastjson2/, and we have test the performance of rocketmq with fastjson2.0.5. In our very early test results, compared with fastjson1.2.76, the P99 latency have decreased significantly in some case.
So maybe rocketmq can upgrade fastjson1.x to fastjson2.x?

@hzh0425
Copy link
Member

hzh0425 commented Jun 9, 2022

Of course, maybe you can launch a pr to upgrade

@ltamber
Copy link
Contributor

ltamber commented Jun 9, 2022

Of course, maybe you can launch a pr to upgrade

+1

@ShannonDing
Copy link
Member

other fastjson version: 3bd4b2b

@lizhanhui
Copy link
Contributor

RocketMQ should be en route migrating to a library that respects standards and is simple enough, without the risk of introducing security vulnerabilities.

@ferrirW
Copy link
Contributor

ferrirW commented Apr 27, 2023

Is there have data to illustrate the specific effect of this enhancement. @wanweiqiangintel

Copy link

This issue is stale because it has been open for 365 days with no activity. It will be closed in 3 days if no further activity occurs.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Apr 27, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 1, 2024

This issue was closed because it has been inactive for 3 days since being marked as stale.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as completed May 1, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

7 participants