It is more aggressive than originally discussed, but only by one release. I think at this point, given the EOL of Jetty 9 we should be upgrading to Jetty 12 (and therefore raising our min Java version to Java 17) as fast as possible.
Gian On 2025/06/17 21:41:29 Clint Wylie wrote: > re Druid 35 - since Hadoop doesn't support java 17 yet, I think that > means we would also have to drop that too. I'm on board, but wondering > if that Is too aggressive? > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 2:15 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Actually, I wonder if Druid 35 would be a better time to drop Java 11. It's > > a little sooner, but, there are reasons to do this earlier because of Jetty > > 9 being EOL. It's EOL as of this year. If we need any security fixes they > > will only be available in Jetty 12, which requires Java 17. We could target > > an upgrade to Jetty 12 and a dropping of Java 11 both for Druid 35. > > > > Gian > > > > On 2025/06/17 19:17:22 Gian Merlino wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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
