How is the performance of Jackson ObjectMapper as static field in a singleton class?
I am thinking of using Jackson ObjectMapper for serializing/deserializing data for my production project.
Right now I have declared ObjectMapper as a static field in a singleton class (Spring Component) having serialize and deserialize methods. Both these method will use this static variable.
I am aware that the Jackson ObjectMapper is thread safe but I want to know will there be any performance issues observed when these methods are called multiple (of the order thousands) times concurrently?
I read it somewhere that object serialization is a heavy weight
and lengthy operation and there can be synchronization delays since the incoming threads can be locked at a given time waiting for the owner of the lock to complete the serialization/deserialization of JSON. Is it true?
The reason I don't want to initialize a new instance of ObjectMapper in each of serialize/deserialize methods is because it is a costly operation.
@Component
public class converter {
private static final ObjectMapper OBJECTMAPPER = new ObjectMapper().configure(
DeserializationFeature.FAIL_ON_UNKNOWN_PROPERTIES, false).setSerializationInclusion(
JsonInclude.Include.NON_NULL);
public String serialize(Object value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.writeValueAsString(...)
...
}
public Object deserialize(String value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.readValue(...)
...
}
}
spring jackson singleton jackson-databind
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
add a comment |
I am thinking of using Jackson ObjectMapper for serializing/deserializing data for my production project.
Right now I have declared ObjectMapper as a static field in a singleton class (Spring Component) having serialize and deserialize methods. Both these method will use this static variable.
I am aware that the Jackson ObjectMapper is thread safe but I want to know will there be any performance issues observed when these methods are called multiple (of the order thousands) times concurrently?
I read it somewhere that object serialization is a heavy weight
and lengthy operation and there can be synchronization delays since the incoming threads can be locked at a given time waiting for the owner of the lock to complete the serialization/deserialization of JSON. Is it true?
The reason I don't want to initialize a new instance of ObjectMapper in each of serialize/deserialize methods is because it is a costly operation.
@Component
public class converter {
private static final ObjectMapper OBJECTMAPPER = new ObjectMapper().configure(
DeserializationFeature.FAIL_ON_UNKNOWN_PROPERTIES, false).setSerializationInclusion(
JsonInclude.Include.NON_NULL);
public String serialize(Object value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.writeValueAsString(...)
...
}
public Object deserialize(String value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.readValue(...)
...
}
}
spring jackson singleton jackson-databind
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
If you are really very concern of the performance , you can consider to further useObjectReader/ObjectWriteroverObjectMapper. Also consider usingAfterburnerJackson module.
– Ken Chan
Dec 27 '18 at 18:51
The fact that it's thread-safe doesn't mean it uses locks. It is designed to be used concurrently.
– JB Nizet
Dec 27 '18 at 18:57
add a comment |
I am thinking of using Jackson ObjectMapper for serializing/deserializing data for my production project.
Right now I have declared ObjectMapper as a static field in a singleton class (Spring Component) having serialize and deserialize methods. Both these method will use this static variable.
I am aware that the Jackson ObjectMapper is thread safe but I want to know will there be any performance issues observed when these methods are called multiple (of the order thousands) times concurrently?
I read it somewhere that object serialization is a heavy weight
and lengthy operation and there can be synchronization delays since the incoming threads can be locked at a given time waiting for the owner of the lock to complete the serialization/deserialization of JSON. Is it true?
The reason I don't want to initialize a new instance of ObjectMapper in each of serialize/deserialize methods is because it is a costly operation.
@Component
public class converter {
private static final ObjectMapper OBJECTMAPPER = new ObjectMapper().configure(
DeserializationFeature.FAIL_ON_UNKNOWN_PROPERTIES, false).setSerializationInclusion(
JsonInclude.Include.NON_NULL);
public String serialize(Object value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.writeValueAsString(...)
...
}
public Object deserialize(String value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.readValue(...)
...
}
}
spring jackson singleton jackson-databind
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
I am thinking of using Jackson ObjectMapper for serializing/deserializing data for my production project.
Right now I have declared ObjectMapper as a static field in a singleton class (Spring Component) having serialize and deserialize methods. Both these method will use this static variable.
I am aware that the Jackson ObjectMapper is thread safe but I want to know will there be any performance issues observed when these methods are called multiple (of the order thousands) times concurrently?
I read it somewhere that object serialization is a heavy weight
and lengthy operation and there can be synchronization delays since the incoming threads can be locked at a given time waiting for the owner of the lock to complete the serialization/deserialization of JSON. Is it true?
The reason I don't want to initialize a new instance of ObjectMapper in each of serialize/deserialize methods is because it is a costly operation.
@Component
public class converter {
private static final ObjectMapper OBJECTMAPPER = new ObjectMapper().configure(
DeserializationFeature.FAIL_ON_UNKNOWN_PROPERTIES, false).setSerializationInclusion(
JsonInclude.Include.NON_NULL);
public String serialize(Object value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.writeValueAsString(...)
...
}
public Object deserialize(String value) {
OBJECTMAPPER.readValue(...)
...
}
}
spring jackson singleton jackson-databind
spring jackson singleton jackson-databind
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
asked Dec 27 '18 at 18:31
Vaibhav Jain
357
357
If you are really very concern of the performance , you can consider to further useObjectReader/ObjectWriteroverObjectMapper. Also consider usingAfterburnerJackson module.
– Ken Chan
Dec 27 '18 at 18:51
The fact that it's thread-safe doesn't mean it uses locks. It is designed to be used concurrently.
– JB Nizet
Dec 27 '18 at 18:57
add a comment |
If you are really very concern of the performance , you can consider to further useObjectReader/ObjectWriteroverObjectMapper. Also consider usingAfterburnerJackson module.
– Ken Chan
Dec 27 '18 at 18:51
The fact that it's thread-safe doesn't mean it uses locks. It is designed to be used concurrently.
– JB Nizet
Dec 27 '18 at 18:57
If you are really very concern of the performance , you can consider to further use
ObjectReader/ObjectWriter over ObjectMapper . Also consider using Afterburner Jackson module.– Ken Chan
Dec 27 '18 at 18:51
If you are really very concern of the performance , you can consider to further use
ObjectReader/ObjectWriter over ObjectMapper . Also consider using Afterburner Jackson module.– Ken Chan
Dec 27 '18 at 18:51
The fact that it's thread-safe doesn't mean it uses locks. It is designed to be used concurrently.
– JB Nizet
Dec 27 '18 at 18:57
The fact that it's thread-safe doesn't mean it uses locks. It is designed to be used concurrently.
– JB Nizet
Dec 27 '18 at 18:57
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53949375%2fhow-is-the-performance-of-jackson-objectmapper-as-static-field-in-a-singleton-cl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53949375%2fhow-is-the-performance-of-jackson-objectmapper-as-static-field-in-a-singleton-cl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
If you are really very concern of the performance , you can consider to further use
ObjectReader/ObjectWriteroverObjectMapper. Also consider usingAfterburnerJackson module.– Ken Chan
Dec 27 '18 at 18:51
The fact that it's thread-safe doesn't mean it uses locks. It is designed to be used concurrently.
– JB Nizet
Dec 27 '18 at 18:57