Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Jackson Vs. Gson [closed]

After searching through some existing libraries for JSON, I have finally ended up with these two:

  • Jackson
  • Google GSon

I am a bit partial towards GSON, but word on the net is that GSon suffers from a certain celestial performance issue (as of Sept 2009).

I am continuing my comparison; in the meantime, I'm looking for help to make up my mind.

like image 358
Suraj Chandran Avatar asked Mar 04 '10 10:03

Suraj Chandran


People also ask

Which is best Jackson or GSON?

ConclusionBoth Gson and Jackson are good options for serializing/deserializing JSON data, simple to use and well documented. Advantages of Gson: Simplicity of toJson/fromJson in the simple cases. For deserialization, do not need access to the Java entities.

Is GSON open source?

Gson (also known as Google Gson) is an open-source Java library to serialize and deserialize Java objects to (and from) JSON.

What is the difference between JSON and Jackson?

JSON is a data format. Jackson is a Java library that can parse JSON.

Is GSON fast?

No need to create mapping − Gson API provides default mapping for most of the objects to be serialized. Performance − Gson is quite fast and is of low memory footprint.


2 Answers

I did this research the last week and I ended up with the same 2 libraries. As I'm using Spring 3 (that adopts Jackson in its default Json view 'JacksonJsonView') it was more natural for me to do the same. The 2 lib are pretty much the same... at the end they simply map to a json file! :)

Anyway as you said Jackson has a + in performance and that's very important for me. The project is also quite active as you can see from their web page and that's a very good sign as well.

like image 164
mickthompson Avatar answered Oct 19 '22 12:10

mickthompson


Jackson and Gson are the most complete Java JSON packages regarding actual data binding support; many other packages only provide primitive Map/List (or equivalent tree model) binding. Both have complete support for generic types, as well, as enough configurability for many common use cases.

Since I am more familiar with Jackson, here are some aspects where I think Jackson has more complete support than Gson (apologies if I miss a Gson feature):

  • Extensive annotation support; including full inheritance, and advanced "mix-in" annotations (associate annotations with a class for cases where you can not directly add them)
  • Streaming (incremental) reading, writing, for ultra-high performance (or memory-limited) use cases; can mix with data binding (bind sub-trees) -- EDIT: latest versions of Gson also include streaming reader
  • Tree model (DOM-like access); can convert between various models (tree <-> java object <-> stream)
  • Can use any constructors (or static factory methods), not just default constructor
  • Field and getter/setter access (earlier gson versions only used fields, this may have changed)
  • Out-of-box JAX-RS support
  • Interoperability: can also use JAXB annotations, has support/work-arounds for common packages (joda, ibatis, cglib), JVM languages (groovy, clojure, scala)
  • Ability to force static (declared) type handling for output
  • Support for deserializing polymorphic types (Jackson 1.5) -- can serialize AND deserialize things like List correctly (with additional type information)
  • Integrated support for binary content (base64 to/from JSON Strings)
like image 38
StaxMan Avatar answered Oct 19 '22 14:10

StaxMan