Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Yuki Morishita
+1 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Jeremiah D Jordan jerem...@datastax.com wrote: With Java 7 being EOL for free versions I am +1 on this. If you want to stick with 7, you can always keep running 2.1. On May 7, 2015, at 11:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote: We discussed

Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Jonathan Ellis
We discussed requiring Java 8 previously and decided to remain Java 7-compatible, but at the time we were planning to release 3.0 before Java 7 EOL. Now that 8099 and increased emphasis on QA have delayed us past Java 7 EOL, I think it's worth reopening this discussion. If we require 8, then we

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Ryan McGuire
+1, from a testing perspective we run dtest and unit tests on hotspot 8 and openjdk 8 and have seen no problems. On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote: We discussed requiring Java 8 previously and decided to remain Java 7-compatible, but at the time we were

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Jeremiah D Jordan
With Java 7 being EOL for free versions I am +1 on this. If you want to stick with 7, you can always keep running 2.1. On May 7, 2015, at 11:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote: We discussed requiring Java 8 previously and decided to remain Java 7-compatible, but at the time we

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Gary Dusbabek
+1 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote: We discussed requiring Java 8 previously and decided to remain Java 7-compatible, but at the time we were planning to release 3.0 before Java 7 EOL. Now that 8099 and increased emphasis on QA have delayed us past

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Aleksey Yeschenko
The switch will necessarily hurt 3.0 adoption, but I think we’ll live. To me, the benefits (mostly access to lambdas and default methods, tbh) slightly outweigh the downsides. +0.1 --  AY On May 7, 2015 at 19:22:53, Gary Dusbabek (gdusba...@gmail.com) wrote: +1 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Jeremy Hanna
There’s no reason why people can’t run java 8 with 2.1. IIRC the only issue we’d had with it was Dave’s https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7028. That’s probably the best thing for people to do though - run java 8 with 2.1 so the jump to 3.0 isn’t as significant. Good point.

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
I have no position on this, but I would like to issue a word of caution to everyone excited to use the new JDK8 features in development to please discuss their use widely beforehand, and to consider them carefully. Many of them are not generally useful to us (e.g. LongAdder), and may have

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Nick Bailey
Is running 2.1 with java 8 a supported or recommended way to run at this point? If not then we'll be requiring users to upgrade both java and C* at the same time when making the jump to 3.0. On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko alek...@apache.org wrote: The switch will necessarily

Re: Requiring Java 8 for C* 3.0

2015-05-07 Thread Jonathan Ellis
Yes, it is. On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Nick Bailey n...@datastax.com wrote: Is running 2.1 with java 8 a supported or recommended way to run at this point? If not then we'll be requiring users to upgrade both java and C* at the same time when making the jump to 3.0. On Thu, May 7, 2015