Is running 2.1 with java 8 a supported or recommended way to run at this point? If not then we'll be requiring users to upgrade both java and C* at the same time when making the jump to 3.0.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> wrote: > The switch will necessarily hurt 3.0 adoption, but I think we’ll live. To > me, the benefits (mostly access to lambdas and default methods, tbh) > slightly outweigh the downsides. > > +0.1 > > -- > AY > > On May 7, 2015 at 19:22:53, Gary Dusbabek (gdusba...@gmail.com) wrote: > > +1 > > On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We discussed requiring Java 8 previously and decided to remain Java > > 7-compatible, but at the time we were planning to release 3.0 before > Java 7 > > EOL. Now that 8099 and increased emphasis on QA have delayed us past Java > > 7 EOL, I think it's worth reopening this discussion. > > > > If we require 8, then we can use lambdas, LongAdder, StampedLock, > Streaming > > collections, default methods, etc. Not just in 3.0 but over 3.x for the > > next year. > > > > If we don't, then people can choose whether to deploy on 7 or 8 -- but > the > > vast majority will deploy on 8 simply because 7 is no longer supported > > without a premium contract with Oracle. 8 also has a more advanced G1GC > > implementation (see CASSANDRA-7486). > > > > I think that gaining access to the new features in 8 as we develop 3.x is > > worth losing the ability to run on a platform that will have been EOL > for a > > couple months by the time we release. > > > > -- > > Jonathan Ellis > > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > > @spyced > > >
