TBH I also think Druid 35 is a better candidate because the jetty 9 is close to 9 years old and is EOL. We donot want to be in a boat where a CVE in jetty requires us to upgrade to jetty 12 for a patched release. Also we want to move to Kafka 4.0 clients sooner rather than later. Kafka 4 requires druid to move to java 17 since our unit tests use the kafka embedded server.
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 3:11 AM Clint Wylie <cwy...@apache.org> wrote: > re Druid 35 - since Hadoop doesn't support java 17 yet, I think that > means we would also have to drop that too. I'm on board, but wondering > if that Is too aggressive? > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 2:15 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Actually, I wonder if Druid 35 would be a better time to drop Java 11. > It's a little sooner, but, there are reasons to do this earlier because of > Jetty 9 being EOL. It's EOL as of this year. If we need any security fixes > they will only be available in Jetty 12, which requires Java 17. We could > target an upgrade to Jetty 12 and a dropping of Java 11 both for Druid 35. > > > > Gian > > > > On 2025/06/17 19:17:22 Gian Merlino wrote: > > > This sounds good to me. > > > > > > On 2025/06/09 20:11:41 Clint Wylie wrote: > > > > Following up on this, I want to propose the first release of 2026 for > > > > removal, which I think would be Druid 36, to give some lead time for > > > > those affected to prepare (which is the same timeline I proposed for > > > > Hadoop removal). > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 1:39 AM Clint Wylie <cwy...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I guess we need to add this to the pile of reasons to drop java 11: > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/y35cxlj90hwx6cv3kds9j8yqnmqgcczv > which > > > > > if i understand correctly it looks like datasketches is only doing > new > > > > > stuff with java 17, older versions only getting fixes. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 10:36 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > abhis...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > oh, good point. I agree then that we should drop Hadoop support. > It should > > > > > > be alarming enough for Hadoop users that it still doesn't > support Java 17 > > > > > > while many big data projects have either dropped or considering > dropping > > > > > > support for Java 11. We will never see zero Hadoop usage in the > community. > > > > > > While dropping Hadoop support will disappoint some users, the > benefits for > > > > > > the broader community outweigh the downsides. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 11:32 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Hadoop: if core Druid code starts requiring Java 17, > we might > > > > > > > run into issues with running that core Druid code inside the > remote Hadoop > > > > > > > M/R processes. People would need to update their YARN runners > to Java 17. > > > > > > > And given Hadoop doesn't officially support Java 17 yet, this > might cause > > > > > > > problems with Hadoop itself. This set of challenges would I > think be more > > > > > > > troublesome than running the Hadoop client inside Druid > processes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me this is a strong additional reason to stop supporting > Hadoop sooner > > > > > > > rather than later. The need for our code to be able to run > inside Hadoop > > > > > > > M/R processes, given how slow Hadoop moves, creates a need to > support older > > > > > > > Java versions and imposes a limit on our ability to use new > Java features. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024/12/17 07:44:12 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > > > > > > > > Do we really need to wait for Hadoop runtime to support Java > 17 if the > > > > > > > > Hadoop client jars themselves can be used in JDK 17 runtime? > Spark > > > > > > > dropped > > > > > > > > support for Java 11 but I think, spark jobs can still use > Hadoop client > > > > > > > > code. So I am not sure if Hadoop is really a blocker for us > to move off > > > > > > > > Java 11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 2:08 AM Clint Wylie < > cwy...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that we have removed support for Java 8, I wanted to > start a > > > > > > > > > discussion about dropping support for Java 11 as well > since it is also > > > > > > > > > pretty old, and making 17 the minimum supported version. > There are a > > > > > > > > > lot of nice language features with newer java versions, so > getting a > > > > > > > > > bit more aggressive about refreshing the minimum supported > version > > > > > > > > > periodically would allow us to begin to take advantage of > these > > > > > > > > > improvements, and would also reduce the number of tests we > need to run > > > > > > > > > in the CI pipeline. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am aware of a couple of things to consider in this > discussion, the > > > > > > > > > first being that Hadoop does not yet support Java 17 as a > runtime. > > > > > > > > > Though it does seem to be planned > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17177, I am > unsure of the > > > > > > > > > timeline for it to be released, so we might need to wait > until this > > > > > > > > > happens before we can totally remove it. I am starting > another thread > > > > > > > > > to survey Hadoop usage to see if this actually needs to be > a blocker > > > > > > > > > or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The other thing I believe we would need to resolve is the > Javascript > > > > > > > > > based functionality, which is disabled by default in > Druid, requires > > > > > > > > > some work to keep being supported. > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/14795 describes the > details I > > > > > > > > > believe, and now that Java 8 has been dropped can probably > be > > > > > > > > > re-opened or at least used as a start to resolve this > problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyone aware of any additional issues with doing this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > >
