> On 30 Jun 2022, at 07:53, Moritz Mack <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Thanks so much Luke!
> Just to confirm, given beam-runners-spark has a much longer history, it looks 
> like the numbers are swapped.

Yes, I guess it’ a typo there. Spark3 runner artifacts got to be distributed 
starting from Beam 2.29.0

> Looks like this – unfortunately - sheds a different light on this thread… 
> thoughts?

As I said privately, I believe that the deprecation of Spark2 runner should 
finally accelerate the process of migration to Spark3. Officially we still keep 
it for the next 3 Beam releases but we can extend this period if needed.

—
Alexey

>  
> On 29.06.22, 17:21, "Luke Cwik" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
> wrote:
>  
> Here are the download stats for the last month listed by version and count. 
> beam-runners-spark 2.29.0 16 2.30.0 22 2.31.0 22 2.32.0 16 2.33.0 18 2.34.0 
> 17 2.35.0 47 2.36.0 160 2.37.0 17 2.38.0 114 2.39.0 23 All 472 
> beam-runners-spark-3 ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
> This Message Is From an External Sender
> This message came from outside your organization.
> Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking any links.
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
> Here are the download stats for the last month listed by version and count.
>  
> beam-runners-spark
> 2.29.0 16
> 2.30.0 22
> 2.31.0 22
> 2.32.0 16
> 2.33.0 18
> 2.34.0 17
> 2.35.0 47
> 2.36.0 160
> 2.37.0 17
> 2.38.0 114
> 2.39.0 23
> All 472
>  
> beam-runners-spark-3
> 0.1.0-incubating 24
> 0.2.0-incubating 41
> 0.3.0-incubating 44
> 0.4.0 36
> 0.5.0 26
> 0.6.0 48
> 2.0.0 400
> 2.1.0 30
> 2.2.0 34
> 2.3.0 25
> 2.4.0 32
> 2.5.0 77
> 2.6.0 23
> 2.7.0 25
> 2.8.0 27
> 2.9.0 26
> 2.10.0 27
> 2.11.0 21
> 2.12.0 321
> 2.13.0 162
> 2.14.0 21
> 2.15.0 32
> 2.16.0 35
> 2.17.0 18
> 2.18.0 67
> 2.19.0 29
> 2.20.0 22
> 2.21.0 23
> 2.22.0 47
> 2.23.0 19
> 2.24.0 63
> 2.25.0 17
> 2.26.0 23
> 2.27.0 18
> 2.28.0 81
> 2.29.0 268
> 2.30.0 26
> 2.31.0 24
> 2.32.0 69
> 2.33.0 403
> 2.34.0 352
> 2.35.0 1543
> 2.36.0 50
> 2.37.0 19
> 2.38.0 420
> 2.39.0 86
> All 5224
>  
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 1:24 AM Moritz Mack <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Who could help pulling the latest Maven download stats for beam-runners-spark 
> and beam-runners-spark-3 for the last few Beam releases?
>  
> Thanks so much!
> / Moritz
>  
> On 01.04.22, 16:54, "Moritz Mack" <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>  
> I just started looking into the Spark runner code a bit to helpfully help 
> supporting it. Besides having to maintain (test!) twice the number of 
> artifacts, there’s also a significant negative impact on developer ergonomics 
> / productivity supporting 
> I just started looking into the Spark runner code a bit to helpfully help 
> supporting it.
> Besides having to maintain (test!) twice the number of artifacts, there’s 
> also a significant negative impact on developer ergonomics / productivity 
> supporting multiple major versions (separate modules to deal with breaking 
> changes and all the trouble that comes with that).
>  
> Thanks, Alexey, for opening the discussion. Certainly a big +1 from my side.
>  
> / Moritz
>  
>  
>  
> From: Alexey Romanenko <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> Date: Thursday, 31. March 2022 at 18:51
> To: dev <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Stop Spark2 support in Spark Runner
> 
> !-------------------------------------------------------------------|
>   This Message Is From an External Sender
>   This message came from outside your organization.
>   Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking any
>   links.
> |-------------------------------------------------------------------!
> 
> 
> > On 31 Mar 2022, at 18:02, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected] 
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > 
> > Generally makes sense to me, though I'm curious what the maintenance
> > burden is *high or low) in keeping it around.
> 
> Well, we need to provide two versions of spark runner artifacts, job-servers 
> and docker images, to test them separately (different Jenkins jobs). We also 
> have two different code paths for the cases where API is not compatible 
> between Spark2 and Spark3.  
> 
> > We should probably
> > deprecate it for a period of time before removing support.
> 
> Agree and I’d suggest even ask users on user@/twitter before. 
> 
> 
> Actually, I see some problem with naming. By default, we used to call “Spark 
> runner” as a runner that works with Spark2 (for example, the artifacts 
> [1][2]). When Spark3 support was added, all its Beam artifacts and related 
> names reflect its version [3][4]. So, it’s not clear how it will be better to 
> deal with this, especially, taking into account, that new Spark version (4, 
> 5, etc) will be available sooner or later. Perhaps, to avoid a confusion in 
> the future, we need to follow the same naming pattern.
> 
> —
> Alexey
> 
> [1] 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZbVIoOAIg$
>  
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZbVIoOAIg$>
>  
> [2] 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark-job-server__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZZb2YMCkw$
>  
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark-job-server__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZZb2YMCkw$>
>  
> [3] 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark-3__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZZYlOwKfg$
>  
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark-3__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZZYlOwKfg$>
>  
> [4] 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark-3-job-server__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZaC2NvaLw$
>  
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/search.maven.org/artifact/org.apache.beam/beam-runners-spark-3-job-server__;!!CiXD_PY!URNp5UzJrCpB9s1jH33QcFeeNp5f3S7yzes0A03mrqRxCP9P3ZJZy1_2l3mF5QcCHmGhxZl0fWKf9ZaC2NvaLw$>
>  
> 
> > 
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 8:52 AM Alexey Romanenko
> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Hi everyone,
> >> 
> >> For the moment, Beam Spark Runner supports two versions of Spark - 2.x and 
> >> 3.x.
> >> 
> >> Taking into account the several things that:
> >> - almost all cloud providers already mostly moved to Spark 3.x as a main 
> >> supported version;
> >> - the latest Spark 2.x release (Spark 2.4.8, maintenance release) was done 
> >> almost a year ago;
> >> - Spark 3 is considered as a mainstream Spark version for development and 
> >> bug fixing;
> >> - better to avoid the burden of maintenance (there are some 
> >> incompatibilities between Spark 2 and 3) of two versions;
> >> 
> >> I’d suggest to stop support Spark 2 for the Spark Runner in the one of the 
> >> next Beam releases.
> >> 
> >> What are your thoughts on this? Are there any principal objections or 
> >> reasons for not doing this that I probably missed?
> >> 
> >> —
> >> Alexey
> >> 
> >> 
> 
> As a recipient of an email from Talend, your contact personal data will be on 
> our systems. Please see our privacy notice. <https://www.talend.com/privacy/>
>  
> 
> As a recipient of an email from Talend, your contact personal data will be on 
> our systems. Please see our privacy notice. <https://www.talend.com/privacy/>
>  
> 
> As a recipient of an email from Talend, your contact personal data will be on 
> our systems. Please see our privacy notice. <https://www.talend.com/privacy/>

Reply via email to