[DISCUSS] LevelDB store

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] LevelDB store

Hadrian Zbarcea
Hi,

The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
remove it in 5.16.0?

Hadrian
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

christopher.l.shannon
+1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably time
to be removed.

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
> remove it in 5.16.0?
>
> Hadrian
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

Hadrian Zbarcea
Thanks Chris,

I would mention that leveldb will still stay in 5.15.x which will be
maintained for a significant time, giving users enough time to migrate
back to kahadb.

Let's give it a few days and see how much consensus there is in the
community.

Cheers,
Hadrian


On 12/21/2017 07:31 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:

> +1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably time
> to be removed.
>
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
>> remove it in 5.16.0?
>>
>> Hadrian
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

christopher.l.shannon
Yeah makes sense to see if anyone has any objections to removing it
completely.  I'm ok removing it but not sure if others are still relying on
it (We might even want to ask this question on the users list)

Here is the original thread about the deprecation discussion:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-LevelDB-deprecation-td4719227.html

As I pointed out in my last post in that thread, we can still keep it
around if there are objections but I suspect it will eventually start to
cause issues if we don't maintain it (such as if we upgrade to JDK 9, or
other dependencies being upgraded like Guava)

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks Chris,
>
> I would mention that leveldb will still stay in 5.15.x which will be
> maintained for a significant time, giving users enough time to migrate back
> to kahadb.
>
> Let's give it a few days and see how much consensus there is in the
> community.
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
>
>
> On 12/21/2017 07:31 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
>
>> +1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably time
>> to be removed.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
>>> remove it in 5.16.0?
>>>
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

artnaseef
I like removing it.

One concern comes to mind - this really is a non-backward-compatible
change, right?  Do we bump the major version number, or do we ignore
semantic versioning?

I know that can get into a bigger discussion - I'm not trying to open a can
of worms.  However, I do think we need to be mindful of this concern.

Art


On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Christopher Shannon <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yeah makes sense to see if anyone has any objections to removing it
> completely.  I'm ok removing it but not sure if others are still relying on
> it (We might even want to ask this question on the users list)
>
> Here is the original thread about the deprecation discussion:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-LevelDB-
> deprecation-td4719227.html
>
> As I pointed out in my last post in that thread, we can still keep it
> around if there are objections but I suspect it will eventually start to
> cause issues if we don't maintain it (such as if we upgrade to JDK 9, or
> other dependencies being upgraded like Guava)
>
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Chris,
> >
> > I would mention that leveldb will still stay in 5.15.x which will be
> > maintained for a significant time, giving users enough time to migrate
> back
> > to kahadb.
> >
> > Let's give it a few days and see how much consensus there is in the
> > community.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Hadrian
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/21/2017 07:31 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
> >
> >> +1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably
> time
> >> to be removed.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
> >>> remove it in 5.16.0?
> >>>
> >>> Hadrian
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

Hadrian Zbarcea
Hi Art,

Valid concern. In my opinion it doesn't apply. From the messaging
application perspective there is no backward incompatibility introduced.
The broker behaves exactly as before. No need to change anything in the
client code.

What one could argue is that there is an incompatibility because
configuration (activemq.xml) that used to work now doesn't. That is true
and users, only the minority who use leveldb-store, will now have to
change configuration and retest. And that is mostly admins, not
developers. We propose to address that by maintaining it for the
foreseeable future on the 5.15.x branch and give them ample time to migrate.

Is that sufficient? Well, that's what this thread is meant to assess.
That's why we have discuss threads. Not everybody will have the same
opinion, but hopefully we converge on something. One of my pain points
in proposing this is the long time it takes to test, which is something
I am looking into again. The instability of the leveldb tests and the
fact that they are taking so long while leveldb-store is deprecated was
one motivator. Fwiw, there are a couple of issues in mqtt and unit tests
as well. A (not so) secret goal I have is to get the Jenkins builds back
on green. Contributions appreciated :).

Cheers,
Hadrian



On 12/21/2017 12:57 PM, Arthur Naseef wrote:

> I like removing it.
>
> One concern comes to mind - this really is a non-backward-compatible
> change, right?  Do we bump the major version number, or do we ignore
> semantic versioning?
>
> I know that can get into a bigger discussion - I'm not trying to open a can
> of worms.  However, I do think we need to be mindful of this concern.
>
> Art
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Christopher Shannon <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Yeah makes sense to see if anyone has any objections to removing it
>> completely.  I'm ok removing it but not sure if others are still relying on
>> it (We might even want to ask this question on the users list)
>>
>> Here is the original thread about the deprecation discussion:
>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-LevelDB-
>> deprecation-td4719227.html
>>
>> As I pointed out in my last post in that thread, we can still keep it
>> around if there are objections but I suspect it will eventually start to
>> cause issues if we don't maintain it (such as if we upgrade to JDK 9, or
>> other dependencies being upgraded like Guava)
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Chris,
>>>
>>> I would mention that leveldb will still stay in 5.15.x which will be
>>> maintained for a significant time, giving users enough time to migrate
>> back
>>> to kahadb.
>>>
>>> Let's give it a few days and see how much consensus there is in the
>>> community.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/21/2017 07:31 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably
>> time
>>>> to be removed.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
>>>>> remove it in 5.16.0?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

christopher.l.shannon
I don't think it applies here either.  Hadrian made the same point I was
about to just make which is that it's really just a configuration change
and not a code incompatibility.

Also, there is precedent already.  The old AMQ store was removed around
version 5.8 or 5.9 I think.

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Art,
>
> Valid concern. In my opinion it doesn't apply. From the messaging
> application perspective there is no backward incompatibility introduced.
> The broker behaves exactly as before. No need to change anything in the
> client code.
>
> What one could argue is that there is an incompatibility because
> configuration (activemq.xml) that used to work now doesn't. That is true
> and users, only the minority who use leveldb-store, will now have to change
> configuration and retest. And that is mostly admins, not developers. We
> propose to address that by maintaining it for the foreseeable future on the
> 5.15.x branch and give them ample time to migrate.
>
> Is that sufficient? Well, that's what this thread is meant to assess.
> That's why we have discuss threads. Not everybody will have the same
> opinion, but hopefully we converge on something. One of my pain points in
> proposing this is the long time it takes to test, which is something I am
> looking into again. The instability of the leveldb tests and the fact that
> they are taking so long while leveldb-store is deprecated was one
> motivator. Fwiw, there are a couple of issues in mqtt and unit tests as
> well. A (not so) secret goal I have is to get the Jenkins builds back on
> green. Contributions appreciated :).
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
>
>
>
> On 12/21/2017 12:57 PM, Arthur Naseef wrote:
>
>> I like removing it.
>>
>> One concern comes to mind - this really is a non-backward-compatible
>> change, right?  Do we bump the major version number, or do we ignore
>> semantic versioning?
>>
>> I know that can get into a bigger discussion - I'm not trying to open a
>> can
>> of worms.  However, I do think we need to be mindful of this concern.
>>
>> Art
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Christopher Shannon <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah makes sense to see if anyone has any objections to removing it
>>> completely.  I'm ok removing it but not sure if others are still relying
>>> on
>>> it (We might even want to ask this question on the users list)
>>>
>>> Here is the original thread about the deprecation discussion:
>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-LevelDB-
>>> deprecation-td4719227.html
>>>
>>> As I pointed out in my last post in that thread, we can still keep it
>>> around if there are objections but I suspect it will eventually start to
>>> cause issues if we don't maintain it (such as if we upgrade to JDK 9, or
>>> other dependencies being upgraded like Guava)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Chris,
>>>>
>>>> I would mention that leveldb will still stay in 5.15.x which will be
>>>> maintained for a significant time, giving users enough time to migrate
>>>>
>>> back
>>>
>>>> to kahadb.
>>>>
>>>> Let's give it a few days and see how much consensus there is in the
>>>> community.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Hadrian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12/21/2017 07:31 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably
>>>>>
>>>> time
>>>
>>>> to be removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't we
>>>>>> remove it in 5.16.0?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB store

artnaseef
I'm okay with taking the stance that it's an acceptable "break" on removing
LevelDB.  As Hadrian pointed out, it's only non-backward-compatible for
folks using LevelDB.  Nobody else should be impacted.

With that said, can we clearly mark the release notes that it has been
removed, and provide brief examples of LevelBD uses in the broker.xml file
and pom.xml files that need to be eliminated for anyone that is impacted?
Are there any other uses to mention?

One point I'd like to raise on this subject - I don't want to just assume
it's ok because it's happened before - the 5.x broker has already had
multiple non-backward-compatible changes, such as the complete
restructuring of the MBean name space about 2 years ago.

Being mindful and choosing how changes are adopted - that's really what I'm
hoping to achieve.

Thank you for the discussion.

Art


On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Christopher Shannon <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't think it applies here either.  Hadrian made the same point I was
> about to just make which is that it's really just a configuration change
> and not a code incompatibility.
>
> Also, there is precedent already.  The old AMQ store was removed around
> version 5.8 or 5.9 I think.
>
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Art,
> >
> > Valid concern. In my opinion it doesn't apply. From the messaging
> > application perspective there is no backward incompatibility introduced.
> > The broker behaves exactly as before. No need to change anything in the
> > client code.
> >
> > What one could argue is that there is an incompatibility because
> > configuration (activemq.xml) that used to work now doesn't. That is true
> > and users, only the minority who use leveldb-store, will now have to
> change
> > configuration and retest. And that is mostly admins, not developers. We
> > propose to address that by maintaining it for the foreseeable future on
> the
> > 5.15.x branch and give them ample time to migrate.
> >
> > Is that sufficient? Well, that's what this thread is meant to assess.
> > That's why we have discuss threads. Not everybody will have the same
> > opinion, but hopefully we converge on something. One of my pain points in
> > proposing this is the long time it takes to test, which is something I am
> > looking into again. The instability of the leveldb tests and the fact
> that
> > they are taking so long while leveldb-store is deprecated was one
> > motivator. Fwiw, there are a couple of issues in mqtt and unit tests as
> > well. A (not so) secret goal I have is to get the Jenkins builds back on
> > green. Contributions appreciated :).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Hadrian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/21/2017 12:57 PM, Arthur Naseef wrote:
> >
> >> I like removing it.
> >>
> >> One concern comes to mind - this really is a non-backward-compatible
> >> change, right?  Do we bump the major version number, or do we ignore
> >> semantic versioning?
> >>
> >> I know that can get into a bigger discussion - I'm not trying to open a
> >> can
> >> of worms.  However, I do think we need to be mindful of this concern.
> >>
> >> Art
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Christopher Shannon <
> >> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yeah makes sense to see if anyone has any objections to removing it
> >>> completely.  I'm ok removing it but not sure if others are still
> relying
> >>> on
> >>> it (We might even want to ask this question on the users list)
> >>>
> >>> Here is the original thread about the deprecation discussion:
> >>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-LevelDB-
> >>> deprecation-td4719227.html
> >>>
> >>> As I pointed out in my last post in that thread, we can still keep it
> >>> around if there are objections but I suspect it will eventually start
> to
> >>> cause issues if we don't maintain it (such as if we upgrade to JDK 9,
> or
> >>> other dependencies being upgraded like Guava)
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Chris,
> >>>>
> >>>> I would mention that leveldb will still stay in 5.15.x which will be
> >>>> maintained for a significant time, giving users enough time to migrate
> >>>>
> >>> back
> >>>
> >>>> to kahadb.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's give it a few days and see how much consensus there is in the
> >>>> community.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Hadrian
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 12/21/2017 07:31 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> +1, it has been deprecated and not maintained for a while so probably
> >>>>>
> >>>> time
> >>>
> >>>> to be removed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The activemq-leveldb-store module is already deprecated. Shouldn't
> we
> >>>>>> remove it in 5.16.0?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hadrian
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
>