Choosing Between WildFly 8 and GlassFish 4: Key Differences

As the landscape of enterprise Java applications evolves, the need for robust, reliable, and flexible application servers has gained prominence. Two contenders that frequently enter the discussion are WildFly 8 and GlassFish 4. Understanding the differences between these two application servers can help developers choose the most suited platform for their projects. Let's dive deeper into their features, performance, and usability.

Beginning Insights to WildFly and GlassFish

What is WildFly?

WildFly, originally known as JBoss Application Server, is a flexible, lightweight, and modular Java EE application server. In its eighth version, it brought forth several improvements, particularly regarding performance, ease of use, and developer experience. WildFly runs on the full Java EE platform and is optimized for high-throughput environments, making it an excellent choice for modern application development.

What is GlassFish?

GlassFish is an open-source application server under the Oracle umbrella. It is the reference implementation for Java EE and focuses on implementing features aligned with the latest Java EE specifications. GlassFish provides an easy setup process and a rich set of capabilities, making it attractive for development and production scenarios.

Key Differences Between WildFly 8 and GlassFish 4

When comparing WildFly 8 and GlassFish 4, several key factors warrant consideration:

1. Performance

Performance is a prime aspect when determining the suitability of an application server.

• WildFly: Known for its high performance, WildFly is designed with a non-blocking architecture, allowing for better resource utilization. It supports asynchronous processing and does not impose heavy memory overhead, which makes it suitable for resource-constrained environments. The performance tuning guide provides various strategies to enhance WildFly's performance further.

// A simple asynchronous method in a WildFly application
@Asynchronous
public Future<String> performTask() {
    // Performing a long-running task
    String result = heavyProcessing();
    return new AsyncResult<>(result);
}

// This allows other requests to be processed while heavyProcessing runs.

• GlassFish: GlassFish offers solid performance but has often been viewed as slower compared to WildFly, primarily due to its architecture and resource management. However, with features like connection pooling and caching, GlassFish can still handle sizeable enterprise-level applications effectively.

2. Ease of Use

Next, let's look at user experience and service management capabilities.

• WildFly: The server management is facilitated through a powerful web-based console or a command-line interface. The Admin Console is intuitive and allows rapid deployment and management of applications. Additionally, WildFly's modular architecture means that you can employ only the features you need, ensuring a leaner setup.

• GlassFish: Similarly, GlassFish offers an excellent web-based administration console that promotes ease of use. With straightforward deployment options through .WAR and .EAR files, developers can push updates with minimal friction. However, some users have noted that the configuration can be complex for advanced features.

3. Java EE Features

Both servers support the Java EE ecosystem but differ in specifications support and feature richness.

• WildFly: As a community-driven project, WildFly tends to adopt the latest features more quickly. For example, WildFly 8 includes support for features like JAX-RS 2.0 for RESTful APIs and Java Transaction API (JTA) for managing transactions.

@Path("/api/data")
public class MyResource {

    @GET
    @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
    public Response getData() {
        // Implementation of your API logic
        return Response.ok(data).build();
    }
}

• GlassFish: GlassFish is the reference implementation and is often first to support core Java EE specifications. However, it may lag slightly behind on newer innovations compared to WildFly. GlassFish 4 supports Java EE 7, including features like WebSocket and Batch Processing.

4. Community and Support

Community engagement and support can significantly influence a developer's choice.

• WildFly: Backed by the JBoss community under Red Hat, WildFly has a vibrant developer community. This leads to substantial resources, tutorials, and forums available for troubleshooting unusual issues.

• GlassFish: As GlassFish is under the stewardship of Oracle, it might not have a community vibe that is as welcoming as WildFly's. However, official Oracle documentation provides robust support.

5. Cloud Compatibility

With cloud-native applications becoming more prevalent, cloud support is an aspect to consider.

• WildFly: WildFly is designed with cloud capabilities in mind. Its lightweight nature and modular setup make it inherently adaptable to cloud environments, enabling easy scaling on platforms like AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud.

• GlassFish: While GlassFish can be deployed in cloud environments, it has not been as heavily optimized for clouds as WildFly. GlassFish can run well but may require additional configuration efforts for effective cloud deployment.

Wrapping Up: Which One to Choose?

In wrapping up, both WildFly 8 and GlassFish 4 have strong cases for their use in different scenarios.

• Choose WildFly 8 if you are looking for performance, cloud-native capabilities, quick adoption of the latest technologies, and an engaging community.

• Choose GlassFish 4 if you need a reliable reference implementation of Java EE with strong support for full Java EE features but are prepared for a potentially steeper learning curve for advanced configurations.

The best choice ultimately depends on your specific project requirements, team expertise, and future scalability needs. You can delve deeper into each server using the official WildFly documentation or GlassFish documentation.

By evaluating these key differences, developers can make a well-informed decision suited to their development landscape.