+1.

Xiao

On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 12:49 PM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm OK with this. It simplifies maintenance a bit, and specifically may
> allow us to finally move off of the ancient version of Guava (?)
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 10:16 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, All.
>>
>> I'm wondering if the following Apache Spark Hadoop2 Binary Distribution
>> is still used by someone in the community or not. If it's not used or not
>> useful,
>> we may remove it from Apache Spark 3.4.0 release.
>>
>>
>> https://downloads.apache.org/spark/spark-3.3.0/spark-3.3.0-bin-hadoop2.tgz
>>
>> Here is the background of this question.
>> Since Apache Spark 2.2.0 (SPARK-19493, SPARK-19550), the Apache
>> Spark community has been building and releasing with Java 8 only.
>> I believe that the user applications also use Java8+ in these days.
>> Recently, I received the following message from the Hadoop PMC.
>>
>>   > "if you really want to claim hadoop 2.x compatibility, then you have
>> to
>>   > be building against java 7". Otherwise a lot of people with hadoop 2.x
>>   > clusters won't be able to run your code. If your projects are java8+
>>   > only, then they are implicitly hadoop 3.1+, no matter what you use
>>   > in your build. Hence: no need for branch-2 branches except
>>   > to complicate your build/test/release processes [1]
>>
>> If Hadoop2 binary distribution is no longer used as of today,
>> or incomplete somewhere due to Java 8 building, the following three
>> existing alternative Hadoop 3 binary distributions could be
>> the better official solution for old Hadoop 2 clusters.
>>
>>     1) Scala 2.12 and without-hadoop distribution
>>     2) Scala 2.12 and Hadoop 3 distribution
>>     3) Scala 2.13 and Hadoop 3 distribution
>>
>> In short, is there anyone who is using Apache Spark 3.3.0 Hadoop2 Binary
>> distribution?
>>
>> Dongjoon
>>
>> [1]
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ORC-1251?focusedCommentId=17608247&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17608247
>>
>

--

Reply via email to