Hey everyone, I'm also in favor of dropping JDK8.
To give some context in the ecosystem, next to Spark 4, a lot of projects are moving beyond Java 8: 1. Arrow dropped JDK8 support last week <https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/43139> which will be part of the next 18.0.0 release. 2. Hive 4.1.0 release will be JDK17+ <https://lists.apache.org/thread/v0v6xhybmz6ssh3hj8cfzh69jb4fxxv6> according to the previous thread. 3. Flink 2.0 will be JDK17+ <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release>, which is cut around the same time as 1.20, which is the upcoming release. 4. Avro 1.12.0 release will be JDK11+ <https://github.com/apache/avro> (there will also be a 1.11.4 release with JDK8 support). It looks like the majority of the ecosystem is going to drop Java 8 within the foreseeable future. I would be in favor of dropping it with 2.0, so we can still do releases on the 1.x branch in case we want to backport features when needed. Kind regards, Fokko Op wo 24 jul 2024 om 08:46 schreef huaxin gao <huaxin.ga...@gmail.com>: > I apologize. I didn't realize this was a formal voting thread. I thought > it was for discussion and voicing concerns. > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 10:56 PM Wing Yew Poon <wyp...@cloudera.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> I just wish to point out that when people started voting, the proposal >> was "dropping JDK 8 support in Iceberg 2.0 release". >> It's fine for people to propose dropping JDK8 support sooner than that >> (and I'm not against that), but the proposal being voted on should not be >> switched mid-vote. >> - Wing Yew >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 10:45 PM huaxin gao <huaxin.ga...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I understand that transitioning from JDK 8 to JDK 11 requires some >>> effort from the users. However, even if we wait until version 2.0, we >>> still encounter the same problem. I don't see the need for more time to >>> test the discontinuation of JDK 8 support. The configuration of Spark 3.5 >>> with JDK 11 and JDK 17 is very stable, and the majority of users are using >>> this setting. Therefore, it seems to me that we don't need to wait more >>> time to drop JDK 8 support. >>> >>> With that said, I don't have an extremely strong opinion on this matter. >>> For Spark 4.0 support, I can change the spark-ci to only run Java 17 for >>> Spark 4.0. However, I probably need to drop a couple of Java 8 CIs >>> because they don't work with Spark 4.0. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Huaxin >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 8:11 PM Manu Zhang <owenzhang1...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, I'm asking for users who use JDK 8 with Spark 3.5. Users can >>>> continue to use 1.6+ with Spark 3.5 and JDK 8 if we continue to support >>>> them. >>>> If we drop JDK 8 support after 1.6, then there might be issues for >>>> Spark 3.5 with JDK 8 users. >>>> >>>> I'm +1 to drop JDK 8 support in 2.0. I think it's worth more discussion >>>> and tests for dropping JDK 8 support in 1.6+ versions, which can be another >>>> thread. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 10:45 AM huaxin gao <huaxin.ga...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Manu, >>>>> Thanks for the discussion. Is your concern about customers who use JDK >>>>> 8 with Spark 3.5? But we will face the same problem if we drop JDK 8 in >>>>> Iceberg 2.0, unless we plan to drop Spark 3.5 support in 2.0. >>>>> >>>>> Huaxin >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 7:30 PM Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, Manu: >>>>>> >>>>>> > If we drop JDK 8 support in 1.7, can Iceberg 1.7+ work seamlessly >>>>>> with Spark 3.5? Otherwise, users might get stuck in 1.6. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think spark 3.5 supports JDK 8/11/17 according to their doc. So >>>>>> users could still use iceberg 1.7+ after upgrading JDK. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 9:40 AM Manu Zhang <owenzhang1...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Not sure about other engines but Spark has JDK 8 support till 3.5, >>>>>>> which looks like a LTS version. >>>>>>> If we drop JDK 8 support in 1.7, can Iceberg 1.7+ work seamlessly >>>>>>> with Spark 3.5? Otherwise, users might get stuck in 1.6. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
