pysimdjson VS embassy

Its magic function wrapping comes at a cost, trading ease of use for runtime performance. When you have a single C++ function to call that will run for a "long" time, pybind all the way. But pysimdjson tends to call a single function very quickly, and the overhead of a single function call is orders of magnitude slower than with cython when being explit with types and signatures. Wrap a class in pybind11 and cython and compare the stack trace between the two, and the difference is startling.

Ex: https://github.com/TkTech/pysimdjson/issues/73

simdjson

You are aware of simdjson being available in python if you really need some json crunching, albeit json module in Python is implemented in C itself, so I don't think understand why do you think Python is slow there?

json: 113.79130696877837 ms

While `orjson`, is faster than `ujson`/`json` here, it's only ~6% faster (in this benchmark). `simdjson` and `msgspec` (my library, see https://jcristharif.com/msgspec/) are much faster due to them avoiding creating PyObjects for fields that are never used.

If spyql's query engine can determine the fields it will access statically before processing, you might find using `msgspec` for JSON gives a nice speedup (it'll also type check the JSON if you know the type of each field). If this information isn't known though, you may find using `pysimdjson` (https://pysimdjson.tkte.ch/) gives an easy speed boost, as it should be more of a drop-in for `orjson`.

I don't think JSON is really the problem - parsing 10MB of JSON is not so slow. For example, using Python's json.load takes about 800ms for a 47MB file on my system, using something like simdjson cuts that down to ~70ms.

thanks. looked that up. for the curious: https://embassy.dev/

Running the Embassy RP2040 USB CDC ACM serial example takes about 5 seconds on a Pico.

https://github.com/embassy-rs/embassy/blob/main/examples/rp/...

Async solves different problems, you can, for instance, have just a single-threaded CPU and still have a nice API if you have async-await. It might not be so cool at a higher level as Go's approach of channels and threads, but it's cool in embedded, read this:

https://github.com/embassy-rs/embassy?tab=readme-ov-file#rus...

"Rust's async/await allows for unprecedently easy and efficient multitasking in embedded systems. Tasks get transformed at compile time into state machines that get run cooperatively. It requires no dynamic memory allocation, and runs on a single stack, so no per-task stack size tuning is required. It obsoletes the need for a traditional RTOS with kernel context switching, and is faster and smaller than one!"

I'm just toying with Raspberry Pi Pico and it's pretty nice.

Go and Rust have different use cases, the async-await is nice at a low level.

I have not yet dipped by toes in the Rust waters, but reading about the embassy project is actually what piqued my curiosity about using C++ coroutines in embedded. Are you familiar with the project or have you found it lacking?

I think I get the basics (shoutout to the Rust Embedded Working Group!), and I've started looking for the stack I'd be using. I think Embassy is really amazing, as well as the work of the ESP team -- hats off.

> }

And this is how to do it using embassy, which is an async framework for embedded in rust:

https://github.com/embassy-rs/embassy/blob/main/examples/rp/...

> not good for embedded

embassy begs to differ

https://embassy.dev/

async/await is really just a syntax for building state machines in a way that resembles regular code. It's compiled down to the same code that you would write by hand anyway (early on it had some bloat in state size but I think it's all fixed now).

And embedded has a lot of state machines!

You can run multiple executors at different interrupt priority levels (with multiple tasks per executor), which allows tasks on the higher priority executor to interrupt other tasks. Here's an example https://github.com/embassy-rs/embassy/blob/main/examples/nrf...