[DISCUSS] PIP-321 Split the responsibilities of namespace replication-clusters

[Xiangying Meng]

Hi, Pulsar Community

I drafted a proposal to make the configuration of clusters at the namespace
level clearer. This helps solve the problem of geo-replication not working
correctly at the topic level.

https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21648

I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

BR
Xiangying

Re: [VOTE] PIP-315: Configurable max delay limit for delayed delivery

[Kai Wang]

+1 (non-binding)

Thanks,
Kai Wang

On 2023/11/15 03:59:46 Kevin Lu wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> This thread is to start a vote for PIP-315.
> 
> PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21490
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/285nm08842or324rxc2zy83wxgqxtcjp
> 
> Regards,
> Kevin
> 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-315: Configurable max delay limit for delayed delivery

[Qiang Zhao]

+1 (binding)

Best,
Mattison

On 2023/11/15 03:59:46 Kevin Lu wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> This thread is to start a vote for PIP-315.
> 
> PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21490
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/285nm08842or324rxc2zy83wxgqxtcjp
> 
> Regards,
> Kevin
> 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-315: Configurable max delay limit for delayed delivery

[Matteo Merli]

+1 (binding)
--
Matteo Merli



On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 9:38 AM Lari Hotari  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> -Lari
>
> On 2023/11/15 03:59:46 Kevin Lu wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > This thread is to start a vote for PIP-315.
> >
> > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21490
> > Discussion thread:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/285nm08842or324rxc2zy83wxgqxtcjp
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kevin
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] PIP-315: Configurable max delay limit for delayed delivery

[Lari Hotari]

+1 (binding)

-Lari

On 2023/11/15 03:59:46 Kevin Lu wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> This thread is to start a vote for PIP-315.
> 
> PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21490
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/285nm08842or324rxc2zy83wxgqxtcjp
> 
> Regards,
> Kevin
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Introducing Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings

[qiaoao]

hi guys,

 I’ m new in this community, but i’d like to volunteer to host the meeting if 
need.

> 2023年11月29日 19:18，Enrico Olivelli  写道：
> 
> Il giorno mer 29 nov 2023 alle ore 12:06 Asaf Mesika
>  ha scritto:
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:03 AM mattison chao 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi, folks.
>>> 
>>> I suggest we can run the office hour meeting every two weeks.
>>> 
>>> - APAC  Wednesday 01:00 (UTC)
>>> - EMEA  Wednesday 09:00  (UTC)
> 
> Works for me.
> 
> Who is going to host the meetings ?
> Where is the place in which we organise who is running the meeting ?
> Should we use some shared Google document ?
> 
> We need to find volunteers to run these meetings.
> We are a community, this is not a paid service, so this is not
> straightforward to organise
> 
> Enrico
> 
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Mattison
>>> 
>>> 
 On Nov 27, 2023, at 07:41, mattison chao  wrote:
 
 Hi, guys.
 
 It’s better to discuss the meeting time. Could you please help share
>>> your thoughts?
 
 Best,
 Mattison
 
> On Nov 21, 2023, at 19:39, mattison chao 
>>> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Enrico
> 
>> Hello,
>> this sounds like a good idea.
>> It is not clear to me who is going to run these meetings (also when
>>> and how)
> 
> Who?
> 
> IMO, our PMC chair can lead this meeting. And all of the commuters can
>>> volunteer to run this meeting.
> 
> When?
> 
> We need to talk about a suitable time range. It’s better to cover
>>> different time zones. EMEA, APAC, etc.
> 
> How?
> 
> I think this office hour is more like Q, which can help users adopt
>>> Pulsar quickly. But we still need to talk about it.
> 
> 
> Best,
> Mattison
> 
>> On Nov 20, 2023, at 23:39, Enrico Olivelli 
>>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> this sounds like a good idea.
>> It is not clear to me who is going to run these meetings (also when
>>> and how)
>> 
>> Can you please share some more context ? Maybe I missed something
>> (both here or on private@)
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Enrico
>> 
>> Il giorno lun 20 nov 2023 alle ore 16:36 PengHui Li
>>  ha scritto:
>>> 
>>> Hi Mattison,
>>> 
>>> It's better to share the information on the Pulsar Slack channel and
>>> user mailing list since the meeting is focused on users.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Penghui
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:18 PM Asaf Mesika 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I think it's a wonderful idea.
 
 Since community engagement in the community meetings are quite low
>>> (1-3
 people top), hopefully we can engage more users through those open
>>> office
 hours.
 
 
 On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 5:11 AM mattison chao <
>>> mattisonc...@gmail.com>
 wrote:
 
> Dear Apache Pulsar Community,
> 
> I hope you are doing well. As our community continues to grow, we
>>> want to
> ensure that everyone has the opportunity to actively participate and
> benefit from the collective knowledge and experience within the
>>> Apache
> Pulsar ecosystem. To achieve this, I discussed with some
>>> contributors,
 and
> we want to introduce a new initiative: Apache Pulsar Office Hour
 Meetings.
> 
> What are Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings?
> 
> Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings are informal gatherings where
>>> both
> developers and users can come together to discuss various aspects of
 Apache
> Pulsar. Unlike our traditional community meetings, which tend to be
>>> more
> developer-focused, these office hours are designed to cater to the
 broader
> community, including users, enthusiasts, and those who are just
>>> starting
> their journey with Apache Pulsar.
> 
> Why Office Hours?
> 
> We've noticed that our community meetings have primarily attracted
> developers, and we want to ensure that we address the needs and
>>> questions
> of our diverse user base. The office hour format allows for a more
>>> open
 and
> user-friendly discussion, allowing users to share their
>>> experiences, ask
> questions, and learn from one another.
> 
> What to Expect?
> 
> During these office hours, we encourage participants to bring their
> questions, share use cases, and discuss any challenges they might
>>> face
 with
> Apache Pulsar. We aim to foster a collaborative environment where
 seasoned
> users and newcomers feel comfortable engaging with the community. We
> believe that this format will help us bridge the gap between
>>> developers
 and
> users, creating a more inclusive and vibrant community.
> 
> When?
> 
> We 

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-320: OpenTelemetry Scaffolding

[Enrico Olivelli]

Il giorno mer 29 nov 2023 alle ore 12:01 Asaf Mesika
 ha scritto:
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 12:18 AM Enrico Olivelli 
> wrote:
>
> > Asaf,
> >
> >
> >
> > Il Mar 28 Nov 2023, 19:14 Asaf Mesika  ha scritto:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > This is the first sub-PIP for parent PIP-264
> > >  ("Enhanced OTel-based
> > metric
> > > system").
> > >
> > > This PIPs goal is to introduce OpenTelemetry into Apache Pulsar. When
> > this
> > > PIP is implemented, we will be able to start converting (not replacing)
> > > existing metrics into OpenTelemetry.
> > >
> >
> > I support the proposal.
> > In the document it is explained that OTel is experimental, not GA and but
> > default it is disabled.
>
>
> Just  to clarify: The sub-title in the PIP referring to that is "Why OTel
> in Pulsar will be marked experimental and not GA".
> Using OTel in Pulsar is experimental, not OTel itself, which is of course
> stable and GA already.
>
>
> >
> > My understanding is that in case it is disabled the impact on the runtime
> > is negligible, is this correct?
> >
>
> I added the following paragraph to the PIP to better explain.
>
> With OTel disabled, the user remains with the existing metrics system.
> OTel in a disabled state operates in a
> no-op mode. This means, instruments do get built, but the instrument
> builders return the same instance of a
> no-op instrument, which does nothing on record-values method (e.g.
> `add(number)`, `record(number)`). The no-op
> `MeterProvider` has no registered `MetricReader` hence when no metric
> collection will be made. The memory impact
> is almost 0 and the same goes for CPU impact.


Perfect.

+1

Thanks

Enrico

>
>
>
>
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > >
> > > Link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21635
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Asaf
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Introducing Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings

[Enrico Olivelli]

Il giorno mer 29 nov 2023 alle ore 12:06 Asaf Mesika
 ha scritto:
>
> +1
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:03 AM mattison chao 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, folks.
> >
> > I suggest we can run the office hour meeting every two weeks.
> >
> > - APAC  Wednesday 01:00 (UTC)
> > - EMEA  Wednesday 09:00  (UTC)

Works for me.

Who is going to host the meetings ?
Where is the place in which we organise who is running the meeting ?
Should we use some shared Google document ?

We need to find volunteers to run these meetings.
We are a community, this is not a paid service, so this is not
straightforward to organise

Enrico

> >
> > Best,
> > Mattison
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 27, 2023, at 07:41, mattison chao  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, guys.
> > >
> > > It’s better to discuss the meeting time. Could you please help share
> > your thoughts?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> > >
> > >> On Nov 21, 2023, at 19:39, mattison chao 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi, Enrico
> > >>
> > >>> Hello,
> > >>> this sounds like a good idea.
> > >>> It is not clear to me who is going to run these meetings (also when
> > and how)
> > >>
> > >> Who?
> > >>
> > >> IMO, our PMC chair can lead this meeting. And all of the commuters can
> > volunteer to run this meeting.
> > >>
> > >> When?
> > >>
> > >> We need to talk about a suitable time range. It’s better to cover
> > different time zones. EMEA, APAC, etc.
> > >>
> > >> How?
> > >>
> > >> I think this office hour is more like Q, which can help users adopt
> > Pulsar quickly. But we still need to talk about it.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Mattison
> > >>
> > >>> On Nov 20, 2023, at 23:39, Enrico Olivelli 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hello,
> > >>> this sounds like a good idea.
> > >>> It is not clear to me who is going to run these meetings (also when
> > and how)
> > >>>
> > >>> Can you please share some more context ? Maybe I missed something
> > >>> (both here or on private@)
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>> Enrico
> > >>>
> > >>> Il giorno lun 20 nov 2023 alle ore 16:36 PengHui Li
> > >>>  ha scritto:
> > 
> >  Hi Mattison,
> > 
> >  It's better to share the information on the Pulsar Slack channel and
> >  user mailing list since the meeting is focused on users.
> > 
> >  Thanks,
> >  Penghui
> > 
> >  On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:18 PM Asaf Mesika 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > I think it's a wonderful idea.
> > >
> > > Since community engagement in the community meetings are quite low
> > (1-3
> > > people top), hopefully we can engage more users through those open
> > office
> > > hours.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 5:11 AM mattison chao <
> > mattisonc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Dear Apache Pulsar Community,
> > >>
> > >> I hope you are doing well. As our community continues to grow, we
> > want to
> > >> ensure that everyone has the opportunity to actively participate and
> > >> benefit from the collective knowledge and experience within the
> > Apache
> > >> Pulsar ecosystem. To achieve this, I discussed with some
> > contributors,
> > > and
> > >> we want to introduce a new initiative: Apache Pulsar Office Hour
> > > Meetings.
> > >>
> > >> What are Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings?
> > >>
> > >> Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings are informal gatherings where
> > both
> > >> developers and users can come together to discuss various aspects of
> > > Apache
> > >> Pulsar. Unlike our traditional community meetings, which tend to be
> > more
> > >> developer-focused, these office hours are designed to cater to the
> > > broader
> > >> community, including users, enthusiasts, and those who are just
> > starting
> > >> their journey with Apache Pulsar.
> > >>
> > >> Why Office Hours?
> > >>
> > >> We've noticed that our community meetings have primarily attracted
> > >> developers, and we want to ensure that we address the needs and
> > questions
> > >> of our diverse user base. The office hour format allows for a more
> > open
> > > and
> > >> user-friendly discussion, allowing users to share their
> > experiences, ask
> > >> questions, and learn from one another.
> > >>
> > >> What to Expect?
> > >>
> > >> During these office hours, we encourage participants to bring their
> > >> questions, share use cases, and discuss any challenges they might
> > face
> > > with
> > >> Apache Pulsar. We aim to foster a collaborative environment where
> > > seasoned
> > >> users and newcomers feel comfortable engaging with the community. We
> > >> believe that this format will help us bridge the gap between
> > developers
> > > and
> > >> users, creating a more inclusive and vibrant community.
> > >>
> > >> When?
> > >>
> > >> We plan to integrate Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings into our
> > existing
> > >> community meeting 

Re: [DISCUSS] Introducing Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings

[Asaf Mesika]

+1

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:03 AM mattison chao 
wrote:

> Hi, folks.
>
> I suggest we can run the office hour meeting every two weeks.
>
> - APAC  Wednesday 01:00 (UTC)
> - EMEA  Wednesday 09:00  (UTC)
>
> Best,
> Mattison
>
>
> > On Nov 27, 2023, at 07:41, mattison chao  wrote:
> >
> > Hi, guys.
> >
> > It’s better to discuss the meeting time. Could you please help share
> your thoughts?
> >
> > Best,
> > Mattison
> >
> >> On Nov 21, 2023, at 19:39, mattison chao 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi, Enrico
> >>
> >>> Hello,
> >>> this sounds like a good idea.
> >>> It is not clear to me who is going to run these meetings (also when
> and how)
> >>
> >> Who?
> >>
> >> IMO, our PMC chair can lead this meeting. And all of the commuters can
> volunteer to run this meeting.
> >>
> >> When?
> >>
> >> We need to talk about a suitable time range. It’s better to cover
> different time zones. EMEA, APAC, etc.
> >>
> >> How?
> >>
> >> I think this office hour is more like Q, which can help users adopt
> Pulsar quickly. But we still need to talk about it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Mattison
> >>
> >>> On Nov 20, 2023, at 23:39, Enrico Olivelli 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
> >>> this sounds like a good idea.
> >>> It is not clear to me who is going to run these meetings (also when
> and how)
> >>>
> >>> Can you please share some more context ? Maybe I missed something
> >>> (both here or on private@)
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Enrico
> >>>
> >>> Il giorno lun 20 nov 2023 alle ore 16:36 PengHui Li
> >>>  ha scritto:
> 
>  Hi Mattison,
> 
>  It's better to share the information on the Pulsar Slack channel and
>  user mailing list since the meeting is focused on users.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  Penghui
> 
>  On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:18 PM Asaf Mesika 
> wrote:
> 
> > I think it's a wonderful idea.
> >
> > Since community engagement in the community meetings are quite low
> (1-3
> > people top), hopefully we can engage more users through those open
> office
> > hours.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 5:11 AM mattison chao <
> mattisonc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Apache Pulsar Community,
> >>
> >> I hope you are doing well. As our community continues to grow, we
> want to
> >> ensure that everyone has the opportunity to actively participate and
> >> benefit from the collective knowledge and experience within the
> Apache
> >> Pulsar ecosystem. To achieve this, I discussed with some
> contributors,
> > and
> >> we want to introduce a new initiative: Apache Pulsar Office Hour
> > Meetings.
> >>
> >> What are Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings?
> >>
> >> Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings are informal gatherings where
> both
> >> developers and users can come together to discuss various aspects of
> > Apache
> >> Pulsar. Unlike our traditional community meetings, which tend to be
> more
> >> developer-focused, these office hours are designed to cater to the
> > broader
> >> community, including users, enthusiasts, and those who are just
> starting
> >> their journey with Apache Pulsar.
> >>
> >> Why Office Hours?
> >>
> >> We've noticed that our community meetings have primarily attracted
> >> developers, and we want to ensure that we address the needs and
> questions
> >> of our diverse user base. The office hour format allows for a more
> open
> > and
> >> user-friendly discussion, allowing users to share their
> experiences, ask
> >> questions, and learn from one another.
> >>
> >> What to Expect?
> >>
> >> During these office hours, we encourage participants to bring their
> >> questions, share use cases, and discuss any challenges they might
> face
> > with
> >> Apache Pulsar. We aim to foster a collaborative environment where
> > seasoned
> >> users and newcomers feel comfortable engaging with the community. We
> >> believe that this format will help us bridge the gap between
> developers
> > and
> >> users, creating a more inclusive and vibrant community.
> >>
> >> When?
> >>
> >> We plan to integrate Apache Pulsar Office Hour Meetings into our
> existing
> >> community meeting schedule. This way, we can maximise participation
> and
> >> ensure that everyone has the opportunity to join the conversation.
> The
> >> office hours will parallel the community meeting, allowing both
> groups to
> >> benefit from shared insights.
> >>
> >> Please leave your valuable comments and suggestions.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >> Mattison
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-320: OpenTelemetry Scaffolding

[Asaf Mesika]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 12:18 AM Enrico Olivelli 
wrote:

> Asaf,
>
>
>
> Il Mar 28 Nov 2023, 19:14 Asaf Mesika  ha scritto:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is the first sub-PIP for parent PIP-264
> >  ("Enhanced OTel-based
> metric
> > system").
> >
> > This PIPs goal is to introduce OpenTelemetry into Apache Pulsar. When
> this
> > PIP is implemented, we will be able to start converting (not replacing)
> > existing metrics into OpenTelemetry.
> >
>
> I support the proposal.
> In the document it is explained that OTel is experimental, not GA and but
> default it is disabled.


Just  to clarify: The sub-title in the PIP referring to that is "Why OTel
in Pulsar will be marked experimental and not GA".
Using OTel in Pulsar is experimental, not OTel itself, which is of course
stable and GA already.


>
> My understanding is that in case it is disabled the impact on the runtime
> is negligible, is this correct?
>

I added the following paragraph to the PIP to better explain.

With OTel disabled, the user remains with the existing metrics system.
OTel in a disabled state operates in a
no-op mode. This means, instruments do get built, but the instrument
builders return the same instance of a
no-op instrument, which does nothing on record-values method (e.g.
`add(number)`, `record(number)`). The no-op
`MeterProvider` has no registered `MetricReader` hence when no metric
collection will be made. The memory impact
is almost 0 and the same goes for CPU impact.




>
> Enrico
>
> >
> > Link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21635
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Asaf
> >
>

Re: [Discuss] Revert #20659 because it introduces a class that is not supported by JDK-1.8

[Yubiao Feng]

Hi Lari

Thank you, I saw all the context. It's such a great comment!!

I reverted the PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20659

Thanks
Yubiao Feng


On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 6:04 PM Lari Hotari  wrote:

> 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
> >
>

Re: [Discuss] Revert #20659 because it introduces a class that is not supported by JDK-1.8

[Lari Hotari]

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
> 

[Discuss] Revert #20659 because it introduces a class that is not supported by JDK-1.8

[Yubiao Feng]

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