Hi,

+1, but keep in mind that we still have users of older Java versions
(8, 11) using thin, JDBC, and other Java-based clients.
Updating our minimum source code version will result in breaking
changes for these users [1].


1. https://github.com/apache/ignite/issues/12261


Best regards,
Ilya Shishkov

вт, 7 апр. 2026 г. в 15:22, Vladislav Pyatkov <[email protected]>:
>
> I am ok.
> I just said that I ran performance tests in JDK 21, and they worked.
> Probably, the efforts to move to JDK 17 are not much different from the
> efforts to move to 21.
> Of course, I did not check whole TC suites.
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2026 at 3:12 PM Aleksandr Chesnokov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Vladislav!
> >
> > As I mentioned before, we already have some failures on JDK 17. One more
> > example is the Binary Objects (Simple Mapper Basic) suite [0]. It is almost
> > green on JDK 11, but consistently red with the JDK 17 tag. Also, as far as
> > I can tell, we do not yet have comparable statistics for JDK 21.
> > So it probably makes sense to first fix the known JDK 17 issues to minimize
> > migration risks, and then move to JDK 17 while running nightly builds on
> > JDK 21 in parallel. What do you think?
> >
> > [0]
> >
> > https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_BinaryObjectsSimpleMapperBasic?tag=JDK_17
> >
> > –
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Aleksandr Chesnokov
> >
>
>
> --
> Vladislav Pyatkov

Reply via email to