This sounds good to me. 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
