Here at Netflix, we have been running Samza on 1.8 since last year and have been in production with it. So move to 1.8 is a welcome. No concerns there for us.
Thanks Monal On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Jacob Maes <jacob.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks everyone. Sounds like a few want to move forward with Java 1.8 > source compatibility. I still think it would be useful to hear from a Java > 1.7 shop. > > Hey Maurice, as I recall you were running Samza on Java 1.7. Is that still > the case? Do you have a roadmap to move to 1.8? Do you typically keep your > Samza instance(s) synced with master? > > Thanks, > Jake > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Navina Ramesh < > nram...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > > +1 for moving to JDK8. > > > > We have traditionally been pretty slow at releasing. I think we need to > > start thinking in terms of long-term release plans and iterate faster. > > > > Prior to Samza 1.0, I think we will at least have 2 releases: > > 0.10.1 -> featuring mostly bug-fixes and improvements to host-affinity > > 0.11.0 -> incorporating experimental features - asynRunLoop > (multithreading > > and Standalone Samza > > 1.0.0 -> stabilized features - AsyncRunLoop and Standalone + experimental > > SQL operator layer > > > > The above release plan is simply what I had in mind. Nothing is concrete! > > :) > > > > Obviously, we shouldn't remove jdk7 support in 0.10.1. Perhaps, 0.11.0. > > will be a good starting point? Or should we wait until we are at 1.0. > > > > I think the users in the community need to provide feedback so we can > make > > progress accordingly. > > > > Thanks! > > Navina > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Roger Hoover <roger.hoo...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 for me. We're already using Java 8 in PRD. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Yi Pan <nickpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I am +1 on the JDK8 move. As Jake has elaborated, there are numerous > > > > advantages from 1.8 source compatible code. > > > > > > > > As for the downside of dropping JDK7 support, obviously, bin > > > > backward-compatibility will be broken. However, moving to JDK8 binary > > is > > > > not a big effort for JDK7-compatible Java and Scala source code, in > > term > > > of > > > > compiling and packaging. There is no need for source code change and > we > > > > have been building JDK8 binary in LinkedIn and running in production > w/ > > > > JDK8 for a long time w/o seeing any issues. > > > > > > > > For users cannot upgrade their runtime JVM version to JDK8 easily, > the > > > > latest coming release will still be on JDK7. Question is: how long > > should > > > > we hold back in waiting for this upgrade? > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > -Yi > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Jacob Maes <jacob.m...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey everyone, > > > > > > > > > > I wanted to start a discussion to see what folks think about moving > > to > > > > Java > > > > > 1.8 source compatibility at some point after the 10.1 release. > > > > > > > > > > Java 8 has a number of nice features that can help us build more > > > concise, > > > > > maintainable, and robust software. A few notable features that > would > > > > > benefit Samza: > > > > > 1. Stream API - provide a compact syntax for expressing > > transformations > > > > on > > > > > collections. These may be foundational for future API work > including > > > > > Operators (SAMZA-914) > > > > > 2. Default Methods - enable us to evolve interfaces without > breaking > > > > > compatibility > > > > > 3. Concurrent package enhancements - generally make concurrent > > > > programming > > > > > easier, which will be more important with features like > > multithreading > > > > > support (SAMZA-863) > > > > > 4. Lambdas - love them or hate them, they do reduce the amount of > > > > > boilerplate code, especially when used in place of anonymous > classes. > > > > > > > > > > It certainly would be nice to leverage some of the features above. > > > > However, > > > > > we have historically supported Java versions N and N-1 and it > doesn't > > > > look > > > > > like Java 9 is coming until next year. So, discontinuing support > for > > > Java > > > > > 1.7 at this point would be a departure from our normal support > matrix > > > > for a > > > > > significant period of time. Thoughts on the pros and cons? > > > > > > > > > > I know some folks in this community are still on Java 1.7. How many > > of > > > > you > > > > > stay up to date with the latest Samza? Do you have a roadmap to > move > > to > > > > > Java 1.8? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Jake > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Navina R. > > >
