Thanks for bringing this up to discussion, Yubiao. Yes, this needs to be reverted.
My bad. I made a mistake in backporting to #20659 [1] since I misinterpreted the version information in the README's "Pulsar Runtime Java Version Recommendation" [2]. These are recommended versions, not strict limits. I should have read more carefully. We switched directly from Java 8 to Java 17 with "PIP-156: Build and Run Pulsar Server on Java 17" [3]. No switch from Java 8 to Java 11 ever happened, although that was discussed in the past a few times on the mailing list and in community meetings. After reverting, it would be a separate task to consider backporting #20659 [1] in a way that is Java 8 compatible. In Java 8 there is support for Cgroups v2 with JDK-8297880 [4] since 8u372. Perhaps we could later find a way to make things work for both Java 8 and Java 11+ to add support for Cgroups v2 also in the 2.10.x branch, if there is demand for addressing that. -Lari 1 - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20659 2 - https://github.com/apache/pulsar#pulsar-runtime-java-version-recommendation 3 - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15207 4 - https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8297880 On 2023/11/29 08:07:41 Yubiao Feng wrote: > Hi all > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20659 introduced the class > `jdk.internal.platform.Container`, but this class was introduced by JDK-11. > So after this PR, `branch-2.10` of Pulsar did not support `JDK-1.8` anymore. > > But our doc-side > https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/2.10.x/getting-started-standalone/#system-requirements > said that the Pulsar release `2.10.x` can be started with `JDK-1.8`. > > So I want to revert the PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20659. > > Thanks > Yubiao Feng >
