samza-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Sammer <esam...@scalingdata.com>
Subject Re: Recommended JDK version?
Date Tue, 09 Dec 2014 21:47:24 GMT
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Jakob Homan <jghoman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Eric had been requesting the JDK6 support on Twitter
> (https://twitter.com/esammer/status/516681461219737600). In response,
> SAMZA-455 was opened but not much lobbying was done there.
>
> @Eric, is it still the case that you feel JDK6 is a hard requirement?
> You made a strong case in the JIRA.  I note that Hadoop is currently
> going JDK7 in 2.7.
>

Thanks for remembering. :)

At the end of the day, there's some threshold where, if N% of projects drop
support, users are forced to upgrade. When they do, they tend to do
everything on a box (and its cluster) together. Mixed-mode deployments
(e.g. Samza @ JDK7, Kafka @ 7, HDFS @ 6) is a recipe for disaster. The
short way of saying that is minVersion(commonProjectsUsedTogether) is the
ideal version to support. If Hadoop and others are dropping support, it's
probably fine. I think the most important thing is that it's clearly
communicated prior to doing so (insert big discussion about deprecation
cycles on "supported platforms"). We weren't able to use Samza as part of
our product as a result of minimum versions. Scala-based projects have
historically been an enormous pain in this regard. I don't know how many
others will be in that boat.


> Would it work for Samza 0.8 to be the last to provide JDK6 support?
> It's likely that Samza 0.9 won't be out for at least a few months, and
> Eric had proposed a strawman approach of continuing JDK6 support for
> six months (back in early November).  So, it's likely that 0.9 would
> reasonably closely meet that timeframe and could be the first
> JDK7-only release...
>

I think that's probably fine. It sounds like 0.8 will have a good lifecycle
prior to 0.9 taking over, giving folks enough runway to plan for a JVM
upgrade. Like I said, when we evaluated Samza, we were blocked on the
dependency. With our timing, it forced us on to other projects, as much as
we really liked and wanted to use Samza. I think there's a big divide in
terms of tolerance of supported platforms between building internal systems
(i.e. SaaS, or in-house) and building "enterprise software" (i.e. software
you ship to folks). I don't pretend our requirements are indicative of the
majority or important to everyone. I also respect the desire for forward
motion in what's supported, and what features are accessible.

The next discussion is probably around which version of Scala to track for
the Samza community over the next N months. There are some obvious
contentious positions[1] on Java 8 being required there as well. That's an
even tougher nut to crack. Some of the related projects still have some
issues running on 8 (ZK, or at least a few months ago when I tried it).

[1] http://scala-lang.org/news/2.12-roadmap

Thanks all!


> -jakob
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Chris Riccomini
> <criccomini@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > We've reached a bit of an impasse between upgrading to Scala 2.11:
> >
> >   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-469
> >
> > And deprecating JDK 6:
> >
> >   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-455
> >
> > It looks as though Scalatra 2.3, which is required for Scala 2.11
> support,
> > was built using JDK 7. This means that upgrading to Scala 2.11 forces us
> > to deprecate JDK 6. It is possible for us to work around this by
> > eliminating the Scalatra dependency, but this would require some work in
> > samza-yarn.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris
> >
> > On 11/4/14 6:58 AM, "Martin Kleppmann" <martin@kleppmann.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Tommy,
> >>
> >>There was a discussion about minimum JDK requirements a few months ago,
> >>and at the time, nobody was asking for JDK 6 support, so we bumped the
> >>requirement up to JDK 7. However, in the meantime, there have been some
> >>requests for JDK 6.
> >>
> >>I've tried to summarise the state of the discussion on this ticket:
> >>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-455 -- please chime in
> there.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Martin
> >>
> >>On 4 Nov 2014, at 13:05, Tommy Becker <tobecker@tivo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey folks,
> >>> I've noticed that the Samza jars from Maven are compiled for JDK 7.  I
> >>>don't see anything about a minimum JDK version on the site.  We are
> >>>currently still on JDK 6 and I'm trying to decide whether we should go
> >>>ahead and upgrade or whether we can recompile Samza for JDK 6.  What are
> >>>your thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> -Tommy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>>
> >>> This email and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged
> >>>material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review,
> >>>copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments) by others is
> >>>prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
> >>>sender immediately and permanently delete this email and any
> >>>attachments. No employee or agent of TiVo Inc. is authorized to conclude
> >>>any binding agreement on behalf of TiVo Inc. by email. Binding
> >>>agreements with TiVo Inc. may only be made by a signed written
> agreement.
> >>
> >
>



-- 
E. Sammer
CTO - ScalingData

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