phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Araujo <alexara...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Drop support for java 1.7 on the 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 branches
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2018 01:19:45 GMT
> If we really want, I bet we could get rid of most of the code we have
for PQS already and just push it into Avatica itself. Just a thought ;)

+1. Even willing to volunteer myself here.

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 5:18 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:

> That makes the most sense to me.
>
> If we really want, I bet we could get rid of most of the code we have
> for PQS already and just push it into Avatica itself. Just a thought ;)
>
> There are some other users of Avatica, but we are, far and away, the
> most prevalent.
>
> On 12/4/18 8:10 PM, Thomas D'Silva wrote:
> > Should we have one repo for the connectors (phoenix-flume, phoenix-hive,
> > phoenix-kafka, phoenix-pig and phoenix-spark)
> > and a separate repo for the queryserver?
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 3:58 PM Vincent Poon <vincentpoon@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 to another repo for connectors
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 6:27 PM James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1. Good idea, Thomas.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 2:57 PM Thomas D'Silva <tdsilva@salesforce.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I believe we will be maintaining the 4.x branches which support HBase
> >>> 1.2,
> >>>> 1.3 and 1.4 for a while.
> >>>> Should we think about pulling out the connectors and queryserver into
> >>> their
> >>>> own repo similar to
> >>>> what HBase did (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20934
> >> ).
> >>>> They could then have
> >>>> their own release schedule and Java support.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 6:53 AM Pedro Boado <pedro.boado@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Well I don't count with a lot more 4.x releases - maybe I'm
> >>> wrong-headed
> >>>> .
> >>>>> For master branch and cdh6 we'd be looking at spark 2.x
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Part of the success of a project is about version stability. Not
a
> >> lot
> >>> of
> >>>>> corporate projects can afford keep upgrading to the latest versions
-
> >>>> think
> >>>>> about it, you're in production, with a few thousand lines code
> >> running
> >>>>> spark 1.6 ... And for upgrading to 4.14 you need to review all of
> >> this
> >>>>> spark code -and maybe recompile to scala 2.11 btw- . It doesn't
make
> >>>> sense.
> >>>>> Until now 4.x was pretty stable and in my opinion it should've never
> >>> been
> >>>>> migrated to spark 2 and java 8. Minor versions should keep certain
> >>>>> stability in terms of dependencies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> All these changes should've come with phoenix 5. But you're right
it
> >>>> needs
> >>>>> a sensible solution as 4.14.1 is already out and compiled with java8.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, 23:28 Thomas D'Silva <tdsilva@salesforce.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Spark 1.6 is really old and doesn't support the newer Datasource
v2
> >>> api
> >>>>>> that we have been looking at integrating with.
> >>>>>> As Alex points out you will might end up having to revert a
lot
> >> more
> >>>>>> commits in the future.
> >>>>>> Seems like the queryserver and phoenix-spark modules on the
cdh
> >>> branch
> >>>>>> would end up diverging a lot from the standard open source branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:23 PM Alex Araujo <alexaraujo@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Only a downgrade to spark 1.6 (
> >>>>>>> changes are only needed in a few IT, basically going back
from
> >>>> Datasets
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> Dataframes)  and going back to Avatica 1.10 ( involving
reverting
> >>>>>>> PHOENIX-4755, PHOENIX-4750 and PHOENIX-4805 ).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We're talking about the 4.x branches, right? Doesn't seem
prudent
> >>> to
> >>>> do
> >>>>>> it
> >>>>>>> there as down-streamers may already be relying on the newer
> >>> versions.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:18 PM Pedro Boado <
> >> pedro.boado@gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thinking about typical server installation in a corporate
> >>>> environment
> >>>>>> I'd
> >>>>>>>> keep everything compatible with the same JVM version.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I've gone down the route for the cdh branch. Full JDK
7
> >>>> compatibility
> >>>>>>>> doesn't require changes in phoenix-core. Only a downgrade
to
> >>> spark
> >>>>> 1.6
> >>>>>> (
> >>>>>>>> changes are only needed in a few IT, basically going
back from
> >>>>> Datasets
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> Dataframes)  and going back to Avatica 1.10 ( involving
> >> reverting
> >>>>>>>> PHOENIX-4755, PHOENIX-4750 and PHOENIX-4805 ).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, 18:57 Thomas D'Silva <
> >> tsilva@salesforce.com
> >>>>>>>> <tdsilva@salesforce.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We could allow individual submodules like the queryserver,
or
> >>>>>>>> phoenix-spark
> >>>>>>>>> to be built with their own compiler configuration
(1.8+).
> >>>>>>>>> This would allow these modules to use Java 1.8 features.
I
> >>> think
> >>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> would
> >>>>>>>>> be a good compromise given that they depend on
> >>>>>>>>> features that are provided by versions of spark
and avatica
> >>> that
> >>>> no
> >>>>>>>> longer
> >>>>>>>>> support Java 1.7.
> >>>>>>>>> We can still ensure phoenix-core supports Java 1.7.
You would
> >>>> have
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> skip
> >>>>>>>>> building modules that require Java 1.8, WDYT?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 6:11 PM Jaanai Zhang <
> >>>>> cloud.poster@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I'd vote for keep using java7 on 4.x branches.
if upgrades
> >> to
> >>>>>> java8,
> >>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>> will impact users who want to upgrade the latest
4.x
> >>> branches.
> >>>>> they
> >>>>>>>> must
> >>>>>>>>>> consider using java8 in their running environments,
 maybe
> >>>> their
> >>>>>>>>> libraries
> >>>>>>>>>> do not support java8, then they have to give
up to upgrade.
> >>> So
> >>>> I
> >>>>>>> think
> >>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>> drops support java7 is not friendly for some
users.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>     Jaanai Zhang
> >>>>>>>>>>     Best regards!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Pedro Boado <pedro.boado@gmail.com> 于2018年11月30日周五
> >> 上午6:13写道:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd vote for keep compiling 4.x branches
in java7. It
> >> makes
> >>>>> sense
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>>>>> just a new minor release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It's pretty easy reverting back to spark
1.6 and also
> >>> avatica
> >>>>>>>>> dependency
> >>>>>>>>>>> could be reverted to the previous version.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 29 Nov 2018 21:41, "Thomas D'Silva" <
> >>>> tdsilva@salesforce.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We have traditionally followed HBase's java
support (see
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://hbase.apache.org/book.html#basic.prerequisites).
> >>> The
> >>>>>>>>>>> phoenix-queryserver module has a dependency
on Avatica
> >>> which
> >>>>> does
> >>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>> support Java 1.7. The phoenix-spark module
depends on
> >> spark
> >>>>> 2.3.2
> >>>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>>>>> also does not support Java 1.7. Do folks
feel we should
> >>>>> continue
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> provide
> >>>>>>>>>>> support Java 1.7 on the 1.x branches?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, 18:57 Thomas D'Silva <
> >>> tdsilva@salesforce.com
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We could allow individual submodules like the queryserver,
or
> >>>>>>>> phoenix-spark
> >>>>>>>>> to be built with their own compiler configuration
(1.8+).
> >>>>>>>>> This would allow these modules to use Java 1.8 features.
I
> >>> think
> >>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> would
> >>>>>>>>> be a good compromise given that they depend on
> >>>>>>>>> features that are provided by versions of spark
and avatica
> >>> that
> >>>> no
> >>>>>>>> longer
> >>>>>>>>> support Java 1.7.
> >>>>>>>>> We can still ensure phoenix-core supports Java 1.7.
You would
> >>>> have
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> skip
> >>>>>>>>> building modules that require Java 1.8, WDYT?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 6:11 PM Jaanai Zhang <
> >>>>> cloud.poster@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I'd vote for keep using java7 on 4.x branches.
if upgrades
> >> to
> >>>>>> java8,
> >>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>> will impact users who want to upgrade the latest
4.x
> >>> branches.
> >>>>> they
> >>>>>>>> must
> >>>>>>>>>> consider using java8 in their running environments,
 maybe
> >>>> their
> >>>>>>>>> libraries
> >>>>>>>>>> do not support java8, then they have to give
up to upgrade.
> >>> So
> >>>> I
> >>>>>>> think
> >>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>> drops support java7 is not friendly for some
users.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>     Jaanai Zhang
> >>>>>>>>>>     Best regards!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Pedro Boado <pedro.boado@gmail.com> 于2018年11月30日周五
> >> 上午6:13写道:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd vote for keep compiling 4.x branches
in java7. It
> >> makes
> >>>>> sense
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>>>>> just a new minor release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It's pretty easy reverting back to spark
1.6 and also
> >>> avatica
> >>>>>>>>> dependency
> >>>>>>>>>>> could be reverted to the previous version.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 29 Nov 2018 21:41, "Thomas D'Silva" <
> >>>> tdsilva@salesforce.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We have traditionally followed HBase's java
support (see
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://hbase.apache.org/book.html#basic.prerequisites).
> >>> The
> >>>>>>>>>>> phoenix-queryserver module has a dependency
on Avatica
> >>> which
> >>>>> does
> >>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>> support Java 1.7. The phoenix-spark module
depends on
> >> spark
> >>>>> 2.3.2
> >>>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>>>>> also does not support Java 1.7. Do folks
feel we should
> >>>>> continue
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> provide
> >>>>>>>>>>> support Java 1.7 on the 1.x branches?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message