+1 On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 7:04 AM Nicholas Chammas <nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And just for the record, the stats that I screenshotted > <https://lists.apache.org/api/email.lua?attachment=true&id=jd1hyq6c9v1qg0ym5qlct8lgcxk9yd6z&file=7a28ae0d6eb4c25e047ff90601a941f7acfc3214f837604b545b4f926b8eb628> > in > that thread I linked to showed the following page views for each > sub-section under `docs/latest/api/`: > > - python: 758K > - java: 66K > - sql: 39K > - scala: 35K > - r: <1K > > I don’t recall over what time period those stats were collected for, and > there are certainly some factors of how the stats are gathered and how the > various language API docs are accessed that impact those numbers. So it’s > by no means a solid, objective measure. But I thought it was an interesting > signal nonetheless. > > > On Aug 12, 2024, at 5:50 PM, Nicholas Chammas <nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Not an R user myself, but +1. > > I first wondered about the future of SparkR after noticing > <https://lists.apache.org/thread/jd1hyq6c9v1qg0ym5qlct8lgcxk9yd6z> how > low the visit stats were for the R API docs as compared to Python and > Scala. (I can’t seem to find those visit stats > <https://analytics.apache.org/index.php?module=CoreHome&action=index&date=today&period=month&idSite=40#?period=month&date=2024-07-02&idSite=40&category=General_Actions&subcategory=General_Pages> > for > the API docs anymore.) > > > On Aug 12, 2024, at 11:47 AM, Shivaram Venkataraman < > shivaram.venkatara...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi > > About ten years ago, I created the original SparkR package as part of my > research at UC Berkeley [SPARK-5654 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-5654>]. After my PhD I > started as a professor at UW-Madison and my contributions to SparkR have > been in the background given my availability. I continue to be involved in > the community and teach a popular course at UW-Madison which uses Apache > Spark for programming assignments. > > As the original contributor and author of a research paper on SparkR, I > also continue to get private emails from users. A common question I get is > whether one should use SparkR in Apache Spark or the sparklyr package > (built on top of Apache Spark). You can also see this in StackOverflow > questions and other blog posts online: > https://www.google.com/search?q=sparkr+vs+sparklyr . While, I have > encouraged users to choose the SparkR package as it is maintained by the > Apache project, the more I looked into sparklyr, the more I was convinced > that it is a better choice for R users that want to leverage the power of > Spark: > > (1) sparklyr is developed by a community of developers who understand the > R programming language deeply, and as a result is more idiomatic. In > hindsight, sparklyr’s more idiomatic approach would have been a better > choice than the Scala-like API we have in SparkR. > > (2) Contributions to SparkR have decreased slowly. Over the last two > years, there have been 65 commits on the Spark R codebase (compared to > ~2200 on the Spark Python code base). In contrast Sparklyr has over 300 > commits in the same period.. > > (3) Previously, using and deploying sparklyr had been cumbersome as it > needed careful alignment of versions between Apache Spark and sparklyr. > However, the sparklyr community has implemented a new Spark Connect based > architecture which eliminates this issue. > > (4) The sparklyr community has maintained their package on CRAN – it takes > some effort to do this as the CRAN release process requires passing a > number of tests. While SparkR was on CRAN initially, we could not maintain > that given our release process and cadence. This makes sparklyr much more > accessible to the R community. > > So it is with a bittersweet feeling that I’m writing this email to propose > that we deprecate SparkR, and recommend sparklyr as the R language binding > for Spark. This will reduce complexity of our own codebase, and more > importantly reduce confusion for users. As the sparklyr package is > distributed using the same permissive license as Apache Spark, there should > be no downside for existing SparkR users in adopting it. > > My proposal is to mark SparkR as deprecated in the upcoming Spark 4 > release, and remove it from Apache Spark with the following major release, > Spark 5. > > I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts and feedback on this proposal > and I’m happy to create the SPIP ticket for a vote on this proposal using > this email thread as the justification. > > Thanks > Shivaram > > > >
