What all the JVM Node.js clones are missing and what Node.js sets apart are async libraries. There is no async (MySQL) JDBC driver for starters. If your IO drivers are not async, your async container is not very useful in real life.
What all the JVM Node.js clones are missing and what Node.js sets apart are async libraries. There is no async (MySQL) JDBC driver for starters. If your IO drivers are not async, your async container is not very useful in real life.
Python, Ruby and Perl all have the same cultural tolerance for blocking code. The Node.js community has a complete lack of tolerance for blocking code.
I work with the JVM every day (Clojure) and wish it was different wrt the common use of non-blocking code, but it's going to be a long road to get there on the JVM.
Kyle
Netty's entire model is asynchronous, and Java 7 now has AsynchronousChannels for IO which, I assume, Netty will make use of.
All in all, the JVM has a much more solid and performant foundation than anything Node can provide. The whole difference will come down to a programming style preference. I am not entirely sure why Vert.x adopted the Node style rather than the proven servlet container, as I'm sure both styles provide comparable performance. I guess each may shine under different loads/usage patterns (my guess is that Vert.x/Node can squeeze more performance from a single thread, but servlets are more scalable).
If you are dealing with something where you don't know what the wire protocol is and you just have a blocking client library to play with (e.g. JDBC - JDBC is, by definition blocking - see the JDBC API), then you can't do much but to wrap the blocking api in an async facade and limit the number of threads that block at any one time. This is exactly what we do in vert.x. We accept the fact that many libraries in the Java world are blocking (e.g. JDBC) so we allow you to use them by running them on as a worker. This is one area where we differ from node.js. Node.js makes you run everything on an event loop. This is just silly for some things, e.g. long running computations (remember the Fibonacci number affair?), or calling blocking apis. With vert.x you run "event-loopy" things on the event loop but you can run "non event-loopy" things on a worker. It's a hybrid.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/libpq-async.html
https://github.com/brianc/node-postgres/blob/master/src/bind...
(notice the Connect method on line 325 of binding.cc)
At some level a client-server database driver isn't all that different from any other network client; you send a request over a socket and wait for a result. There's no reason you have to block while waiting.
Moreover some databases (like Postgres) let you receive asynchronous notifications signaled by transactions on other connections; that's how trigger-based replication systems like Bucardo do their thing.
Node.js is just a reinvention of old technologies in Javascript.
Edit: Removed flame about Javascript because I don't want to have this debate again.
There are two main things that block in computing:
* I/O
* CPU
You better believe that Node blocks on CPU, so what I/O does Node not block on that Twisted does?
So what?
You get tons of Java libs to use, a majority of blocking ones and lots of non blocking on one hand, or you restrict yourself to the fewer non-blocking libs of varying quality available for Node.
With Java you can also turn blocking libs to non blocking with a wrapper and threads, whereas with Node.js if it's blocking you're screwing, because the js engine is single-threaded.
It's trivial to offload blocking operations to other processes in node too, it's just not the preferred option.
And ruby has 38237 gems. 99,9% of which are garbage.
Library-count is a terrible metric.
Whatever libraries node has is a drop in the bucket compared to java.
BUT: I assume people will move to backend services with REST and combining REST backend results to a page. This increases IO a lot and will kill your latency and default thread models when you do sync code. You'd need to use async IO, composeable futures to manage latency and thread count. And if you do async backend REST, why not do async JDBC etc. But there are no libraries.
Really? So they reject any kind of library that does anything except call a callback? Because everything else, from calculating 2+2 to creating a template blocks. And it doesn't matter when it happens, when it happens it blocks.
What async containers like Netty (and by proxy, Vert.x) solve is high-latency cases like long polling and file upload/download. Netty for one does have support for zero-copy file transfers: http://docs.jboss.org/netty/3.2/xref/org/jboss/netty/example...
In my experience, these are a small percentage of cases so the majority of the app can use blocking I/O -- even long-polling code, as long as you are using the async framework for the client connection.
"Protocol-agnostic RPC System" does not sound like a node clone at all.
Finagle is about composing async IO calls, e.g. here
http://twitter.github.com/scala_school/finagle.html
This works much better in Scala, as Java is not very good at composing Futures. It needs a lot of boiler plate code as it lacks noise free closures.
Would you call Node.js's MySQL drivers "production quality"?
As far production is concerned, they might as well be the same thing.
>BTW there are hundreds of node apps in production.
Do they use some of Node's MySQL drivers though? For they (or their lack thereof) was the topic of this subthread.
transloadit.com, from the module mantainers, has been using it for an year+. I don't have any magic insight into what modules sites use, but judging from the activity in their repo it's quite popular (~1000 watchers, 100+ forks): https://github.com/felixge/node-mysql