JSON uses less space?
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
JSON uses less space?
Im new to JSON , but does transmitting simple payloads over JSON save bandwidth & 'space' compared XML carrying the same info ? A cursory look suggests that. JSON outwardly seems eerily familiar with orchestrate subrecords and vectors [ probably the tagged type]
Probably someone should move this to a new thread....
...but in the meantime, yes on the space issue --- JSON is a lot less verbose. It structurally is very similar to XML, but minus the amount of "tag" overhead. I find it more difficult to just "read" because of the lack of tags and structure that is implied by other symbols instead of simple nesting, but the software doesn't care. ; )
Size isn't the only reason that JSON has a following, but it is one of the major ones. The similarity to orchestrate is interesting, but likely very just a coincidence.
All of us in the DS space need to just deal with whatever we're handed...and as of 9.1, DataStage can do JSON or XML...both are fully supported.
Ernie
...but in the meantime, yes on the space issue --- JSON is a lot less verbose. It structurally is very similar to XML, but minus the amount of "tag" overhead. I find it more difficult to just "read" because of the lack of tags and structure that is implied by other symbols instead of simple nesting, but the software doesn't care. ; )
Size isn't the only reason that JSON has a following, but it is one of the major ones. The similarity to orchestrate is interesting, but likely very just a coincidence.
All of us in the DS space need to just deal with whatever we're handed...and as of 9.1, DataStage can do JSON or XML...both are fully supported.
Ernie
Ernie Ostic
blogit!
<a href="https://dsrealtime.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... ere/">Open IGC is Here!</a>
blogit!
<a href="https://dsrealtime.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... ere/">Open IGC is Here!</a>
