Request Filter Comparison: WebSphere vs Spring Boot | Generated by AI

Home 2025.11 English 中文

---

Overview

Both IBM WebSphere Application Server (WAS, traditional or Liberty) and Spring Boot support the concept of a request processing chain based on the standard Java Servlet API’s javax.servlet.Filter and FilterChain. This is where incoming HTTP requests pass through a series of filters before reaching servlets (or controllers/handlers), and responses can be modified on the way back.

• Filters allow pre-processing (e.g., authentication, logging, compression) and post-processing of requests/responses.
• The core mechanism — implementing Filter, calling chain.doFilter(request, response) to proceed — is identical because both run in a Servlet container (WAS has its own full Java EE web container; Spring Boot embeds Tomcat/Jetty/Undertow by default).

There is no fundamental difference in how a basic “request chain filter” works. However, the way you configure, order, and integrate filters differs significantly due to the architecture of each platform.

Key Comparison

Aspect	IBM WebSphere Application Server (Traditional/Liberty)	Spring Boot
Underlying Mechanism	Standard Servlet filters (javax.servlet.Filter). WAS also has proprietary extensions like ChainedRequest/ChainedResponse for internal request forwarding/chaining in some scenarios (e.g., portal or custom IBM APIs).	Standard Servlet filters. Spring Boot auto-registers any @Component Filter bean or you explicitly register via FilterRegistrationBean.
Configuration	Primarily via web.xml (declarative) or programmatic registration. For global filters (across all apps): complex — requires shared libraries, custom listeners, or IBM-specific extensions (no simple server-wide web.xml like Tomcat).	Convention-over-configuration: Annotate with @Component + @Order for automatic registration, or use FilterRegistrationBean for fine control (URL patterns, dispatcher types). Very developer-friendly.
Ordering	Defined in web.xml order or via @Order if programmatic. Global ordering is tricky.	Easy with @Order(n) (lower = earlier) or Ordered interface. Spring Boot manages the chain automatically.
Security Filter Chain	Uses standard Servlet filters or IBM-specific security (e.g., TAI, JEE roles). No built-in security chain like Spring Security.	Spring Security provides a powerful SecurityFilterChain (via FilterChainProxy) with 15+ ordered filters (CSRF, authentication, session management, etc.). Highly customizable with multiple chains per path.
Ease of Adding Custom Filters	More verbose, especially for global/cross-app filters. Often requires admin console tweaks or shared libs.	Extremely simple — just a @Component bean or config class. Auto-integrated into the embedded container.
Deployment Model	Traditional full Java EE server. Apps deployed as WAR/EAR. Supports heavy enterprise features (clustering, transactions, JMS).	Embedded container (standalone executable JAR by default). Can deploy as WAR to external servers (including WAS). Lightweight/microservices-oriented.
Performance/Overhead	Higher overhead (full app server). Transport chains, web container channels add layers.	Lower overhead (embedded lightweight container). Faster startup, less resource use.
When Filters Run	In WAS web container inbound chain. Can have server-level transport filters (e.g., IP filtering on TCP channels).	In the embedded container’s filter chain. Spring Boot adds its own filters (error handling, character encoding, etc.).
Common Use Cases	Enterprise monoliths, portals, legacy Java EE apps needing global security/logging.	Modern microservices, REST APIs, rapid development with Spring Security.

Practical Examples

Standard Custom Filter (same code works in both):

@Component  // Spring Boot only; in WAS declare in web.xml
@Order(1)
public class LoggingFilter implements Filter {
    public void doFilter(ServletRequest req, ServletResponse res, FilterChain chain)
            throws IOException, ServletException {
        System.out.println("Request: " + ((HttpServletRequest) req).getRequestURI());
        chain.doFilter(req, res);  // Critical: passes to next filter/servlet
    }
    // init/destroy...
}

In Spring Boot (auto-registered): Just the class above + @Component.

In WAS: Add to web.xml:

<filter>
    <filter-name>LoggingFilter</filter-name>
    <filter-class>com.example.LoggingFilter</filter-class>
</filter>
<filter-mapping>
    <filter-name>LoggingFilter</filter-name>
    <url-pattern>/*</url-pattern>
</filter-mapping>

When to Choose Which

• Use WAS filters if you are in a legacy IBM environment, need full Java EE features, or must apply filters globally across many apps without code changes.
• Use Spring Boot filters (especially with Spring Security) for new/greenfield projects, microservices, fast iteration, or when you want multiple security chains and easy ordering.

In summary, the request chain filter concept is the same (Servlet spec), but Spring Boot makes it far simpler and more powerful for most modern use cases, while WAS is more enterprise-heavy and configuration-intensive.

IBM WAS Servlet Filtering Documentation
Spring Boot Custom Filters
Spring Security Filter Chain

---

Back

x-ai/grok-4.1-fast

Donate