[javaee-spec users] Re: Java EE 8 database requirements

From: arjan tijms <>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 00:20:15 +0200

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Bill Shannon <>

> arjan tijms wrote on 05/22/15 13:53:
> Hi,
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Bill Shannon <>
> wrote:
>> Over the years there's been some confusion about whether a Java EE
>> product is required to include a database server. It's not.
> What about the (embedded) database that's backing the default datasource?
> I guess I still wasn't clear.
> The database requirements are separate from the default DataSource
> requirements. A database has always been required as part of the runtime.

I might be missing something here. The default DataSource was a new feature
in Java EE 7. The database that has always been required is another kind of

> There's no requirement that the product include an embedded database.
> Many do, and that makes the product easier to use out of the box, but if
> the vendor prefers to put that burden on the customer they can require that
> the customer acquire, install, and configure a database to use for the
> default DataSource.

That was not entirely my intention of the default DataSource when I filed

The idea was that an application can rely on a store being available,
mostly for new users getting started, testing, or extremely moderate
requirements (like for very simple IoT apps). Although I mentioned this in
the original issue, I hoped to get this more clearly defined via

If a burden can be put on the customer, then the default data source is not
entirely a default data source, but one that may need to be configured or
setup. If that's the case then the entire concept somewhat misses its
intended goal. With the Java EE 6 @DataSourceDefinition a user could
already set up a datasource, but the problem was that this configuration
needed to be done and therefor the solution was deemed to have a very
simple data source that's already configured, setup and ready to be used.

There would be nothing against a vendor *allowing* (not requiring) a user
to configure an external or otherwise alternative database to use for the
default DataSource. In fact, that would be an extremely handy feature to

But at least my goal for the default datasource was to have the spec
guarantee the out of the box experience, not to merely make it possible to
make the product easier to use out of the box.

If there's currently no requirement that the product include an embedded
database, then maybe it's an idea to file an issue that asks for that
requirement? Either by introducing a new concept, say "the default
database", or to add this requirement to the "default datasource"?

Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms