The only reason, in my eyes, to use CSV is to have easy interoperability with spreadsheet software.
If you want streaming: https://jsonlines.org/
Consider Using CSV
11–20 of 112 posts
Re: Consider Using CSV
#12I mean point well taken, but, as they acknowledged in the post themselves, CSV isn't suitable when you have a nested structure. And you almost always have/need a nested structure, no?
Re: Consider Using CSV
#13The only reason, in my eyes, to use CSV is to have easy interoperability with spreadsheet software. If you want streaming: https://jsonlines.org/
Meh.
Excel compatibility really sux. And Excel is most used one by large. You really can't double click it effectivelly, as everything will be shown as generic type, so you have to mess up with wizard which is also half baked. I have to create tutorials for that for each service using it.
Re: Consider Using CSV
#14With gzip on web server the difference is not important at all. CSV in general is problematic as there is no standard (RFC 4180 is not). In certain contexts this surely can be good solution but definitelly not good in general scenario.
As Wikipedia puts it, "CSV is widely used to refer to a large family of formats that differ in many ways". If there's a canonical standard, it appears to be RFC4180: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4180
Re: Consider Using CSV
#15What else do you use if you have to import millions of rows from a client or supplier without direct integration but sftp?
Re: Consider Using CSV
#16The author didn't compare gzipped/brottlied sizes.
The author didn't think of any examples with even a bit more complexity. If you have 2-level object nesting, now what?
Re: Consider Using CSV
#17What else do you use if you have to import millions of rows from a client or supplier without direct integration but sftp?
Often, Parquet. https://parquet.apache.org/
Re: Consider Using CSV
#18You could also consider Kafka for streaming, and Parquet for batch.
Re: Consider Using CSV
#19With gzip on web server the difference is not important at all. CSV in general is problematic as there is no standard (RFC 4180 is not). In certain contexts this surely can be good solution but definitelly not good in general scenario.
As Wikipedia puts it, "CSV is widely used to refer to a large family of formats that differ in many ways". If there's a canonical standard, it appears to be RFC4180: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4180
It appears, but its not. I have not found single program so far that conforms only to this RFC and nothing else.
From the RFC itself:
Status of This Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.Re: Consider Using CSV
#20Delimited formats performance can be exceptional, they can also be phenomenally terse and avoid the string tarpits of CSV and TSV if you just use these unicode characters.
U+241D, U+241E, U+241F