Wildfly Full vs Servlet only when using maven

csbased Jun 22, 2016 11:16 AM

Hello, I'm wondering why would someone need wildfly Full when there is the servlet only distribution and maven.

As far as I understand the Full distribution has the main advantage of having all the jars already built in the server and that's it, that's the only advantage.

However with maven it's really easy to add the technologies you need directly in maven without relying on wildfly having it. This results in an application that seems more portable.

Am I missing something here ? Is there a reason I don't yet understand why would someone use the Full distribution when maven is around?

1. Re: Wildfly Full vs Servlet only when using maven

jamezp Jun 23, 2016 4:40 PM (in response to csbased)

Maven just brings in dependencies, not integration. So if you want something outside what servlet provides you'd likely want to use WildFly Full.

For example say you want JPA, CDI and JAX-RS. You'd have to provide implementations for each API. Those implementations would have to know how to integrate with each other. In JPA if you want to use a DataSource you'd have to bring JCA and Transactions. Those too would have to be integrated to ensure the transactions are managed across all container components.

If all you need is just a servlet container, then you probably don't need WildFlyFull. Once you step outside those needs, say just a CDI, then you more than just a servlet container.

--
James R. Perkins
Actions