So long as EclipseLink is not completely yanked from the repo I would prefer to keep the tests running, even if it means the tests take longer to run. The risk of a regression seems too great.
On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 3:18 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> wrote: > Good point about tests! > > However, I believe it still makes sense to transfer the main body of tests > using a "real database" to JDBC. It should be possible to run one > Integration test on EclipseLink to make sure it works and still not > overload CI. > > Cheers, > Dmitri. > > > On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 1:26 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Hi > > > > I already commented on the PR and forgot to reply here :) > > > > Yes agree to deprecate eclipselink it makes sense to me and promote > > "JDBC" instead. > > > > That said, as said in the PR, I think we should keep the eclipselink > > test still (even if deprecated): deprecation gives time for users to > > "move to" JDBC but they can still use eclipselink, so it makes sense > > to test it to be sure it works and there's no regression here. > > > > Just my $0.01 :) > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 11:59 PM Prashant Singh > > <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://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1123#issuecomment-2756133924 > > > > > > Given these improvements, I propose we: > > > > > > - > > > > > > Deprecate EclipseLink > > > - > > > > > > Make relational JDBC the default persistence implementation > > > > > > PR to support this change: > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1515 > > > > > > Would love to hear your feedback on this. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Prashant > > >
