+1 (non-binding). Agreed with Dmitri that we should attempt to remove EclipseLink post v1.0 release and mark it as deprecated in v1.0 itself.
-Adnan > On May 2, 2025, at 4:03 PM, Dmitri Bourlatchkov > <dmitri.bourlatch...@dremio.com.invalid> wrote: > > Deprecating EclipseLink makes sense to me. > > It served well in the early days of Apache Polaris, but at this stage the > new JDBC impl. outperforms it in terms of ease of use and concurrency, I > think. > > I'd suggest marking the upcoming 1.0 release at the last release with > EclipseLink, unless we know of users that still rely on EclipseLink and do > not have an upgrade path to JDBC. > > Cheers, > Dmitri. > > On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 6:02 PM Prashant Singh > <prashant.si...@snowflake.com.invalid > <mailto:prashant.si...@snowflake.com.invalid>> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I’d like to get your thoughts on deprecating EclipseLink and making JDBC >> the default for our persistence layer. >> >> Our current EclipseLink setup mandates execution within a transaction, >> which has introduced several issues — notably, an improper implementation >> of CAS (compare-and-swap) semantics. To address these shortcomings, Apache >> Polaris underwent a major refactor to decouple persistence interfaces from >> strict transaction dependencies and to ensure actual CAS enforcement. >> >> As part of this effort, we introduced a new JDBC backend with a simpler and >> more performant schema, directly addressing the limitations of the existing >> EclipseLink schema. >> >> We’ve observed significant improvements compared to the EclipseLink >> implementation. Notably, issues such as Polaris failing under minimal >> concurrency (e.g., with just 5 users) have been resolved: >> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1123%23issuecomment-2756133924&source=gmail-imap&ust=1746831856000000&usg=AOvVaw00QPWTgJZQhS8VdpBgwKam >> >> Given these improvements, I propose we: >> >> - >> >> Deprecate EclipseLink >> - >> >> Make relational JDBC the default persistence implementation >> >> PR to support this change: >> [1] >> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1515&source=gmail-imap&ust=1746831856000000&usg=AOvVaw1hxxQTCY4e_ozPVDFfjQs0 >> >> Would love to hear your feedback on this. >> >> Best regards, >> Prashant
