Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
JSON Query Languages
(version: 0)
JMESPath vs JSONata vs JSPath vs JSONPath
Comparing performance of:
JMESPath vs JSONata vs JSPath vs JSONPath
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/jsonata/jsonata.min.js"></script> <script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/jmespath/jmespath.min.js"></script> <script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/jspath/jspath.min.js"></script> <script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/jsonpath"></script>
Script Preparation code:
var testData = {"a": {"b": {"c": {"d": "value"}}}}
Tests:
JMESPath
var jmespathResult = jmespath.search(testData, 'a.b.c.d')
JSONata
var jsonataResult = jsonata('a.b.c.d').evaluate(testData)
JSPath
var jsPathResult = JSPath.apply('.a.b.c.d', testData)
JSONPath
var jsPathResult = jsonpath.query(testData, '$.a.b.c.d')
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
JMESPath
JSONata
JSPath
JSONPath
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 days ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome Mobile 137 on Android
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
JMESPath
273707.7 Ops/sec
JSONata
17957.4 Ops/sec
JSPath
11759880.0 Ops/sec
JSONPath
57507.7 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Measuring the performance of JSON query languages is an essential task, especially with the growing amount of data being stored and processed in various applications. **Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark compares four popular JavaScript libraries for querying JSON data: JMESPath (JMESPath), JSONata, JSPath (JSPATH), and JSONPath. Each library is tested for its execution speed when used to query a predefined test dataset. **Options Compared** The options being compared are: 1. **JMESPath**: Uses a syntax inspired by XPath expressions to query JSON data. 2. **JSONata**: Offers a unique, functional programming-inspired language for querying JSON data. 3. **JSPath (JSPATH)**: Provides a lightweight and efficient way to query JSON data using a simple, dot-based notation. 4. **JSONPath**: Implements the standard JSON Path specification for querying JSON data. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** Here's a brief overview of each library's strengths and weaknesses: 1. **JMESPath**: * Pros: Easy to learn and use, widely adopted, and supports many features (e.g., variables, functions). * Cons: Can be slower than other libraries for simple queries. 2. **JSONata**: * Pros: Offers a unique, functional programming-inspired syntax that can lead to more concise code. * Cons: May require additional learning time due to its proprietary syntax. 3. **JSPath (JSPATH)**: * Pros: Extremely lightweight and efficient, making it suitable for large-scale applications. * Cons: Limited features compared to other libraries. 4. **JSONPath**: * Pros: Standardized specification ensures compatibility across implementations. * Cons: May not be as efficient or user-friendly as other libraries. **Library Descriptions** Here are brief descriptions of the mentioned libraries: 1. **JMESPath**: A JavaScript implementation of the JMESPath query language, which is inspired by XPath expressions. It's widely used and supports many features, making it a popular choice for querying JSON data. 2. **JSONata**: A proprietary query language that offers a functional programming-inspired syntax. It's designed to be concise and efficient, but its unique syntax may require additional learning time. 3. **JSPath (JSPATH)**: A lightweight JavaScript library that provides an efficient way to query JSON data using a simple dot-based notation. Its minimalistic approach makes it suitable for large-scale applications. **Special Features or Syntax** The benchmark doesn't explicitly mention any special features or syntax, but we can assume that each library has its own strengths and weaknesses: * **JMESPath**: Supports variables, functions, and other advanced features. * **JSONata**: Offers a functional programming-inspired syntax with concise code generation. * **JSPath (JSPATH)**: Provides an efficient, lightweight implementation with no additional features. * **JSONPath**: Implements the standard JSON Path specification. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative JavaScript libraries for querying JSON data, consider: 1. **XPath.js**: A JavaScript implementation of the XPath 1.0 specification. 2. **Query.js**: A lightweight library that provides a flexible and efficient way to query JSON data using a simple syntax. In conclusion, each library has its strengths and weaknesses, making it essential to evaluate their performance and features when choosing a suitable library for your specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
lodash merge vs object.assign vs spread - multilevel
Lodash assign vs object.assign
JSON query
JSON vs JS v2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?