Any idea of when a NiFi 2 line would happen - eg. within 2021, not til 2022?
Thanks, Ryan On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 4:34 PM José Luis Pedrosa <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All > > thanks for the replies, I may say some quite incorrect things as I am new > to NiFi. I see that there are two docker images: > > https://github.com/apache/nifi/tree/master/nifi-docker/dockermaven > https://github.com/apache/nifi/tree/master/nifi-docker/dockerhub > > I am assuming what Joey is mentioning (mvn) applies only to "dockermaven"? > Indeed the usual way is to have different tags for different versions of > the underlying bases, which is also already present for us, as nifi chose > (by omission) the default flavour for it (there are a lot of openjdk XX > images, even windows), so one extreme we could generate one per the > different openjdk on the other extreme we could generate only one. Not > sure if any of the JVM settings done in the scripts apply only to one Java > version, potentially there would be the need to add flexibility to work > with both on the scripts. > > From my perspective as a user: I use the container as a container, in this > case I just want the recommended option (performance, stability...) and > after those criterias, the smaller the image the better. > > Happy to help if you have a clear idea if you (apache committers) of what > is the destination desired. > > Kind regards > JL > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 6:07 PM Kevin Doran <[email protected]> wrote: > > > That’s awesome, Joey. I was not aware of that new capability, and > > certainly is an improvement over maintaining multiple Dockerfiles that > only > > differ in their base image. I’ll add that to our readme instructions for > > building the Docker image, and if there is enough interest, we could use > > that method to put out a java 11 based image in the future. > > > > > On Mar 26, 2021, at 13:40, Joey Frazee <[email protected] > .INVALID> > > wrote: > > > > > > Kevin, it’s recently possible to specify the underlying openjdk image > > tag as a property in the Maven build, e.g., -Pdocker > > -Ddocker.image.tag=11-jre so it should be easier to start publishing > those > > now too if it’s decided it’s a good idea. > > > > > > The default remains 8 for the sorts of concerns being discussed, but > > this provides the flexibility for people to use an official source > release > > to build 11-based images. > > > > > > -joey > > > > > >> On Mar 26, 2021, at 8:13 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> Good thread. I'd say when a NiFi 2 line happens Java 8 would be gone > > >> completely and we would/should consider only supporting the latest LTS > > >> line perhaps. > > >> > > >>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:05 AM Kevin Doran <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hi JL, > > >>> > > >>> It’s worth discussing/considering changes such as this periodically, > > so thanks for bringing it up. > > >>> > > >>> Personally, I would be hesitant to make such a large change. While it > > would likely be a net-positive for the NiFi image itself, I think it > would > > impact a number of community members that have Dockerfile’s that use our > > image as a starting point. > > >>> > > >>> A GitHub code search [1] seems to confirm this, showing >100 > > Dockerfiles that contain “FROM apache/nifi*” > > >>> > > >>> For NiFi 1.x, I think the best we could do is leverage tagging to > > offer image variants that differ in layers we build upon, for example OS > or > > JDK/JRE variants. This seems to be a popular method, for example, Apache > > Tomcat offers a multiple of combinations of version, JDK, and OS [2]. > > >>> > > >>> So if it would be beneficial, we could add official images for other > > jdk versions indicated by tags, for example apache/nifi:1.13.2, > > apache/nifi:1.13.2-jre11, etc. > > >>> > > >>> I believe this was part of the plan for the (empty) > > apache/nifi-container code repository [3]. I think the intention was > always > > to build out a richer set of diverse container images based on files in > > this repository, which could be maintained/released decoupled from the > NiFi > > source code itself. With so many in the community running containerized > > NiFi, perhaps it's worth reviving that discussion to see what, if > anything, > > would be most valuable to add to our container offerings. > > >>> > > >>> For NiFi 2 we can and should definitely consider what changes we want > > to make to our “default” base image, including which JRE. > > >>> > > >>> [1] > > > https://github.com/search?l=&q=%22FROM+apache%2Fnifi%22+language%3ADockerfile&type=code > > < > > > https://github.com/search?l=&q=%22FROM+apache/nifi%22+language:Dockerfile&type=code > > > > > >>> [2] https://hub.docker.com/_/tomcat?tab=description < > > https://hub.docker.com/_/tomcat?tab=description> > > >>> [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi-container < > > https://github.com/apache/nifi-container> > > >>> > > >>> Thanks! > > >>> Kevin > > >>> > > >>>>> On Mar 26, 2021, at 07:49, José Luis Pedrosa <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi All > > >>>> > > >>>> I see that the docker images generated are based "openjdk:8-jre" > > should we > > >>>> (I volunteer) to update them to "11-jre"? as both versions are > > supported (8 > > >>>> and 11) I don't see any reason why not, and will be more future > proof. > > >>>> > > >>>> Any opinions? > > >>>> > > >>>> JL > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:59 PM Joe Witt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Mark > > >>>>> > > >>>>> That we can do with a NiFi 2 release for sure. Before then it isnt > > great. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Oracles JVM is not what I see mostly in the wild any longer and we > > do see a > > >>>>> ton of Java 8 usage still. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> We can and should drop Java 8 but itll be important to do it when > we > > cut a > > >>>>> lot of crud out as well. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 6:03 AM Mark Bean <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> I'd like to discuss migrating to Java 11 as the minimum required > > Java > > >>>>>> version for NiFi. We've been supporting both Java 8 and Java 11 > for > > some > > >>>>>> time now. There is increased overhead in verifying builds with two > > >>>>>> different versions. There are some features and syntax available > in > > Java > > >>>>> 11 > > >>>>>> which cannot be used in order for NiFi to remain compatible with > > both > > >>>>>> versions. Java 8 premier support (Oracle) runs out in one year. > > Java 17 - > > >>>>>> the next LTS version - is due out later this year. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> There should be plenty of lead time for users to prepare for the > > >>>>>> transition. So I wanted to start the discussion well in advance of > > when > > >>>>> we > > >>>>>> discontinue Java 8 support. And, logistically how do we best > inform > > the > > >>>>>> community of upcoming changes like this? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>> Mark > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > > >
