Dropping support for Java 11 sounds good to me. By the way, once Java 11 is dropped, we’ll only have one officially supported version, Java 17: https://druid.apache.org/docs/latest/operations/java/#selecting-a-java-runtime
I think there were some segfaults observed in Java 21 that it's been pinned to 21.0.4: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/17806. Maybe we should try again now that version 21.0.7 was released in April 2025? Also, we could consider adding experimental support for Java 25 LTS once it's released later this year (expected September 2025). On 2025/06/09 20:11:41 Clint Wylie wrote: > Following up on this, I want to propose the first release of 2026 for > removal, which I think would be Druid 36, to give some lead time for > those affected to prepare (which is the same timeline I proposed for > Hadoop removal). > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 1:39 AM Clint Wylie <cwy...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I guess we need to add this to the pile of reasons to drop java 11: > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/y35cxlj90hwx6cv3kds9j8yqnmqgcczv which > > if i understand correctly it looks like datasketches is only doing new > > stuff with java 17, older versions only getting fixes. > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 10:36 PM Abhishek Agarwal <abhis...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > oh, good point. I agree then that we should drop Hadoop support. It should > > > be alarming enough for Hadoop users that it still doesn't support Java 17 > > > while many big data projects have either dropped or considering dropping > > > support for Java 11. We will never see zero Hadoop usage in the community. > > > While dropping Hadoop support will disappoint some users, the benefits for > > > the broader community outweigh the downsides. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 11:32 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Regarding Hadoop: if core Druid code starts requiring Java 17, we might > > > > run into issues with running that core Druid code inside the remote > > > > Hadoop > > > > M/R processes. People would need to update their YARN runners to Java > > > > 17. > > > > And given Hadoop doesn't officially support Java 17 yet, this might > > > > cause > > > > problems with Hadoop itself. This set of challenges would I think be > > > > more > > > > troublesome than running the Hadoop client inside Druid processes. > > > > > > > > To me this is a strong additional reason to stop supporting Hadoop > > > > sooner > > > > rather than later. The need for our code to be able to run inside Hadoop > > > > M/R processes, given how slow Hadoop moves, creates a need to support > > > > older > > > > Java versions and imposes a limit on our ability to use new Java > > > > features. > > > > > > > > Gian > > > > > > > > On 2024/12/17 07:44:12 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > > > > > Do we really need to wait for Hadoop runtime to support Java 17 if the > > > > > Hadoop client jars themselves can be used in JDK 17 runtime? Spark > > > > dropped > > > > > support for Java 11 but I think, spark jobs can still use Hadoop > > > > > client > > > > > code. So I am not sure if Hadoop is really a blocker for us to move > > > > > off > > > > > Java 11. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 2:08 AM Clint Wylie <cwy...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Now that we have removed support for Java 8, I wanted to start a > > > > > > discussion about dropping support for Java 11 as well since it is > > > > > > also > > > > > > pretty old, and making 17 the minimum supported version. There are a > > > > > > lot of nice language features with newer java versions, so getting a > > > > > > bit more aggressive about refreshing the minimum supported version > > > > > > periodically would allow us to begin to take advantage of these > > > > > > improvements, and would also reduce the number of tests we need to > > > > > > run > > > > > > in the CI pipeline. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am aware of a couple of things to consider in this discussion, the > > > > > > first being that Hadoop does not yet support Java 17 as a runtime. > > > > > > Though it does seem to be planned > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17177, I am unsure of > > > > > > the > > > > > > timeline for it to be released, so we might need to wait until this > > > > > > happens before we can totally remove it. I am starting another > > > > > > thread > > > > > > to survey Hadoop usage to see if this actually needs to be a blocker > > > > > > or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > The other thing I believe we would need to resolve is the Javascript > > > > > > based functionality, which is disabled by default in Druid, requires > > > > > > some work to keep being supported. > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/14795 describes the details I > > > > > > believe, and now that Java 8 has been dropped can probably be > > > > > > re-opened or at least used as a start to resolve this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyone aware of any additional issues with doing this? > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org
