Binary Formats Are Better Than JSON in Browsers

a year ago

JSON is no longer the fastest option for browser-based web apps; alternatives like Avro, Protobuf, or Bebop should be considered for performance-sensitive applications.
Benchmarking binary encodings in browsers revealed that many alternatives to JSON, including MessagePack, were slower, but recent developments have improved their performance.
Common benchmarking mistakes include using Node.js instead of browsers and focusing on numeric-heavy datasets, which don't reflect typical use cases involving strings.
End-to-end latency measurements, including server request to client processing, provide a more accurate comparison than just deserialization times.
Compression reduces message size differences but doesn't eliminate the extra processing time required for JSON in browsers.
Schema-based encodings like Avro and Protobuf offer built-in validation, adding safety without significant performance overhead.
Lazy decoding in libraries like Flatbuffers and Cap'n Proto can improve performance when not all data is accessed, but materializing full objects may be slower.
Recent browser improvements and library updates have made binary encodings more viable, with Bebop, Avro, and Protobuf showing strong performance.
JSON has limitations, such as string size caps, lack of type support (e.g., 64-bit integers), and no built-in validation, which can lead to runtime errors.
TypeScript and libraries like zod can mitigate some JSON issues, but schema-based encodings provide better end-to-end safety.

Hasty Briefsbeta