Thanks for the clarification Jonathan, I think timing wise, waiting to get 3.2.0 v.s. get 3.1.1 / 3.0.1 would not be much longer.
On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 12:16 PM Jonathan Albrecht <jonathan.albre...@ibm.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Bruno and Guozhang, > > Thanks for your thoughtful replies and I hope I can clarify. I work on > a team that helps port open source software to s390x. The example I used > about users needing to be on a specific minor release is a general one > that I see and not specific to kafka and usually its not due to technical > reasons. For example, sometimes organizations want to support the same > version of a component across platforms and back porting support for > s390x mean they can get to a supported version sooner. Maybe in kafka's > case, there are not technical reasons for that to happen but sometimes > there are organizational reasons. > > Hope that clarifies where I'm coming from. I definitely don't have a > specific technical issue that would be solved by back porting. I > understand there are risks and it might not be appropriate for a bugfix > release which is why I wanted to ask first before going any further. > > Thanks, > > Jon > > "Bruno Cadonna" <cado...@apache.org> wrote on 2022-02-07 05:30:05 AM: > > > From: "Bruno Cadonna" <cado...@apache.org> > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Date: 2022-02-07 05:30 AM > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Kafka <= 3.1 upgrade RocksDB to v6.27.3? > > > > Hi Jonathan and Guozhang, > > > > I am pretty sure that upgrading RocksDB in 3.0.x and 3.1.x should not be > > an issue, since we recently upgraded it to 6.27.3 on trunk and judging > > from the compatibility report in the ticket [1] and the code the API > > does not break backward-compatibility for the AK 3.x series. > > > > I am wondering, why users would not be willing to use the upcoming 3.2.0 > > if they are migrating or creating a Kafka Streams application on the > > s390x platform. Even if we ported the upgrade to 3.1.1 and 3.0.1, they > > would need to wait until those versions are released. Additionally, > > their applications need to comply with 3.x APIs and APIs should be > > backward compatible in the 3.x releases. So, everything that works with > > 3.1.1 and 3.0.1 should also work with 3.2.0. Of course there could be an > > issue in 3.2.0 that will force them to use a 3.1.1 or 3.0.1, but that > > would be rather an exception that we can then fix when the exception > > happens. > > > > Jonathan, could you clarify what the motivation of using hypothetical > > 3.1.1 or 3.0.1 with the RocksDB upgrade instead of 3.2.0 on a platform > > that was not supported before (i.e., 3.1.0 and 3.0.0) might be? > > > > In the end, it is always a risk to upgrade a library in a bugfix release > > without a critical issue that the upgrade fixes. > > > > > > Best, > > Bruno > > > > > > [1] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13599 > > > > > On 07.02.22 04:19, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Hi Jonathan, > > > > > > I'm not against the idea of upgrading in 3.0.x and 3.1.x, assuming that > the > > > v6.27.3 version does not make any API or any semantic behavioral > changes. > > > But I can only speak for myself, not the whole community. For older > > > versions as Bruno mentioned since there's compatibility issues we > cannot > > > upgrade RocksDB any more. > > > > > > > > > Guozhang > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 1:56 PM Jonathan Albrecht > <jonathan.albre...@ibm.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> > > >> Thanks Guozhang, yes the motivation is to support the s390x platform. > It's > > >> not a critical bug for other platforms. > > >> > > >> Any chance that gaining platform support is also a valid reason? I was > > >> hoping it would be but I won't submit a PR if it isn't. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> > > >> Jon > > >> > > >> "Guozhang Wang" <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote on 2022-02-03 02:14:34 PM: > > >> > > >>> From: "Guozhang Wang" <wangg...@gmail.com> > > >>> To: "dev" <dev@kafka.apache.org> > > >>> Date: 2022-02-03 02:15 PM > > >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Kafka <= 3.1 upgrade RocksDB to v6.27.3? > > >>> > > >>> Hello Jonathan, > > >>> > > >>> I think Bruno's point is that we can only upgrade in the bugfix > releases if > > >>> the old version of rocksDB has a critical bug that the new version > would > > >>> fix. For 6.27.3 it seems not fixing a critical bug but for a new > feature, > > >>> and hence unless we change the policy we cannot upgrade in 3.0.1 / > 3.1.1 > > >>> releases. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Guozhang > > >>> > > >>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 9:22 AM Jonathan Albrecht > <jonathan.albre...@ibm.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks for the info Bruno. In that case, if no other concerns, I'll > try > > >>>> updating RocksDB to v6.27.3 on the 3.0 and 3.1 branches and file > issues and > > >>>> PRs if everything looks good. > > >>>> > > >>>> Jon > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> "Bruno Cadonna" <cado...@apache.org> wrote on 2022-02-03 10:40:00 > AM: > > >>>> > > >>>>> From: "Bruno Cadonna" <cado...@apache.org> > > >>>>> To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > >>>>> Date: 2022-02-03 10:40 AM > > >>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Kafka <= 3.1 upgrade RocksDB to v6.27.3? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Hi Jonathan, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> We had to wait until AK 3.0 to upgrade RocksDB to 6.19.3 due to > source > > >>>>> compatibility issue. More specifically, we expose RocksDB APIs in > Kafka > > >>>>> Streams for configuring RocksDB and those RocksDB APIs changed. So > > >>>>> upgrading RocksDB was actually a compatibility breaking change. We > had > > >>>>> to wait for the major release 3.0.0 to make the upgrade. That > means, if > > >>>>> the policy allows to upgrade dependencies in bugfix releases we can > only > > >>>>> upgrade RocksDB in bugfix releases for 3.1 and 3.0. Upgrading > RocksDB in > > >>>>> earlier releases would break compatibility. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Best, > > >>>>> Bruno > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On 03.02.22 15:15, Jonathan Albrecht wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The rocksdbjni dependency has been upgraded to v6.27.3 on trunk > and > > >>>>>> wanted to ask if it would be ok to also upgrade it to v6.27.3 on > the 3.1 > > >>>>>> branch (and possibly earlier branches). I thought I should ask in > case > > >>>>>> there are some policies around changing dependency versions in > point > > >>>>>> releases. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The motivation is that this is the first version of rocksdbjni > that > > >>>>>> supports s390x and it allows kafka to be built out of the box on > this > > >>>>>> platform. Having this support in earlier releases helps users on > s390x > > >>>>>> that > > >>>>>> may need a specific minor release. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> If upgrading earlier releases is ok, how far back would be > reasonable? > > >>>>>> I'm > > >>>>>> happy to create the issues and PRs and do the local testing, of > course. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Jonathan Albrecht > > >>>>>> Advisory Software Developer > > >>>>>> Linux on IBM Z Open Source Ecosystem > > >>>>>> 1 905 413 3577 Office > > >>>>>> jonathan.albre...@ibm.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> IBM > > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> -- Guozhang > > >> > > > > > > > -- -- Guozhang
