Ubiquity of Java and relational databases

I'm sometimes being asked about our platform choices of Java and RDBMS for Darwino. More precisely, I'm getting questions about Node.js or existing JSON document databases, like MongoDB or CouchDB.
Well, I can certainly expand on the technical value of our choices, and I'll probably will. But, if the technical aspect is important, this is not the only driver.  It is not even the main one: what made us choose these technologies can be summarized in 3 words: ubiquity, diversity and skill and assets.


Most of our customers have a Java application server and a relational database already in place. Both are almost everywhere. If small companies can be flexible with technology, bigger companies tend to be more conservative. And not to talk about administrations. With Java and RDBMS you can get in right away without going through technology validation processes.

The cloud is not different: whenever you want to use MS Azure, IBM Bluemix, Oracle Cloud, Amazon AWS, they all offer you PAAS services with a Java application server and an RDBMS. As a result, your not locked with a vendor. For example, and despite its value, if you choose IBM Cloudant, you're locked with IBM Cloud. For the good and the bad... Did I say the bad?

It similarly expands to mobile devices. There is no MongoDB implementation running on these devices, providing offline capabilities with the same set of features. Ok, Cloudant/CouchDB has TouchDB or PouchDB for offline, but these are totally different implementations with different APIs and capabilities. On the other hand, SQLite can be run on any mobile devices from Java.

With Darwino encapsulating the platform differences, like SQL dialects, you write the application once and you can run everywhere, including on mobile devices.


There is not a single implementation of Java and RDBMS. Rather, you can find several vendors providing their own JVM, web application servers or RDBMS, with different characteristics. You pick and choose the one that better fits your need, based on both technical or business decisions.

Diversity fosters innovation because of the competition: the vendors have to innovate to keep the leadership. Moreover, when a great innovation is brought by one vendor, the other vendors will follow shortly. This is exactly what happened recently with the support of JSON data type, or the in-memory RDBMS. Same with Java processing optimization, like async/actor programming (Akka, Vert.x), or distributed VMs, ... In both spaces, the innovation has been rocking these past years, for our own benefit!

On the other hand, if you choose Node.js, well you're locked to one vendor, and even one JS engine (v8). I'm not saying that these are bad, just that you' don't have any choice. Same, and even worse, with MongoDB: do you want to put your business critical data into the hand of a single database vendor? If something goes wrong with these guys, what are your options beyond re-coding your applications to another API/vendor? This is about risk management, a point that every CIO office has in mind.

Of course, diversity implies differences. But it is pretty easy to overcome them or, better, to leverage the strength of a particular implementation when it makes sense.

Skills and assets

Because of their ubiquity, both RDBMS and Java are already well known. This is not only about development skills, but administration, management, backups, and even procurement. The processes are in place. The IT teams are trained: they have to figure day to day issues like performance, network congestion, server availability, quick backup/restore... And they know how to deal with that.

Finally, the Java ecosystem is far more mature than the Node.js one. Yes, Node is vibrant but go to npm: how do you "separate the wheat from the chaff"? You can find many libraries made by individuals, staled at version 0.x and asking for a new owner. There are some open source organizations around this technology but nothing yet that matches Apache, Eclipse or even OpenNTF. You might find licenses coming with the code but this is not enough: what about the certificates of originality? What guarantees you that the code you're using has not been stolen?
As bigger companies are chiming in, this will certainly evolve to a more controlled world. IBM, for example, has it own internal npm server. But I bet that many smaller companies, or companies not in the IT business cannot afford doing the same.

In short, choosing the technologies that power a framework goes way beyond comparing their technical characteristics. There are other factors that can be even more important, and that's the reason why we chose Java and RDBMS. Now, on the pure technical side, both also have very competitive advantage, but I'll expand on that later!