perf: move more implementations to use orjson

[anonrig]

Moves more implementations to use orjson

Ref: #68903

[iamrajjoshi]

🚀 for my knowledge: what benefits do we get by switching?

[anonrig]

🚀 for my knowledge: what benefits do we get by switching?

@iamrajjoshi I forgot the reference for the original issue: #68903. To summarize, performance and JSON specification compliance :-)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 78.12500% with 7 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 80.00%. Comparing base (4b1e575) to head (cf773ce).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #70832   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   80.00%   80.00%           
=======================================
  Files        6507     6507           
  Lines      290833   290855   +22     
  Branches    50123    50131    +8     
=======================================
+ Hits       232686   232705   +19     
- Misses      57711    57714    +3     
  Partials      436      436           

Files	Coverage Δ
src/sentry/conf/locale.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/data_export/models.py	99.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/hybridcloud/tasks/deliver_webhooks.py	96.39% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
src/sentry/identity/gitlab/provider.py	82.75% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/identity/vsts/provider.py	85.96% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/incidents/action_handlers.py	91.30% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/mail/notifications.py	97.29% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/testutils/factories.py	96.00% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
src/sentry/identity/google/provider.py	48.48% <50.00%> (ø)
src/sentry/identity/oauth2.py	87.63% <80.00%> (ø)
... and 2 more

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

[sentry-io]

Suspect Issues

This pull request was deployed and Sentry observed the following issues:

• ‼️ JSONDecodeError: byte order mark (BOM) is not supported: line 1 column 1 (char 0) /identity/login/{provider}/ View Issue

_{Did you find this useful? React with a 👍 or 👎}