Re: RFC: Make new versions of pgjdbc Java8+

On 03/04/17 16:19, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>
> On 3 April 2017 at 10:05, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com
> <mailto:aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 03/04/17 15:57, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>
>> On 3 April 2017 at 07:36, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
>> <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com <mailto:aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 03/04/17 13:05, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2 April 2017 at 19:03, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
>>> <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com <mailto:aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/04/17 00:56, John R Pierce wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/2/2017 3:40 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
>>>
>>> - Java 6 EOLed 2/2013.
>>> - Java 7 EOLed 4/2015.
>>> - Java 8 was released 3 years ago, and brought
>>> significant improvements.
>>> - Java 9 will be (may be) released this year.
>>>
>>>
>>> isn't there a significant lag in version support by
>>> things like web services (j2ee, etc, as embedded in
>>> things like IBM WebSphere) ? j2ee 8 isn't even out
>>> yet. Pretty sure a whole lot of that space is still
>>> stuck back in Java 6 land.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Those are not related things. You can perfectly run
>>> J2EE 6 servers with Java 8 (and indeed, it is beneficial).
>>>
>>>
>>> Álvaro
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------
>>> <8K>data
>>>
>>>
>>> Alvaro,
>>>
>>>
>>> So why do you want to write in java 8 ?
>>
>>
>> Not a comprehensive or ordered list, but a few reasons:
>>
>> - JDK comes with Base64 and cryptographic functions like
>> PBKDF2 that are needed for SCRAM. In Java6 you either
>> implement yourself or pull external dependencies.
>>
>> - You can write conciser code (which improves significantly
>> readability):
>> * Lambas: anonymous classes. Callback-heavy code turns
>> becomes readable.
>> * Streams: unnecessary for loops and other goodies.
>> * Optional: unnecessary ifs.
>> * Since Java7: try-with-resources, 10_000 vs 10000 etc.
>>
>> - Reading Javadoc doesn't hurt my eyes ^_^
>>
>> - Time API, CompletableFuture.
>>
>> - Default and static methods in interfaces!
>>
>>
>> Álvaro
>>
>> --
>>
>> Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
>>
>>
>> -----------
>> <8K>data
>>
>> In the interest of expediency using J8+ is acceptable for the
>> first cut. However. I just checked maven stats for
>> oss.sonatype.org <http://oss.sonatype.org> and while j6 is not
>> getting a lot of downloads, j7 is certainly significant.
>
> I guess you mean statistics for pgjdbc, right?]
>
>
> Yes, sorry for the lack of clarity
>
>
> I'm sure there may be out there still some number of Java7s.
> However, my point is: those can still use any pgjdbc driver at
> least up to v42. And they are mature, performant, fully featured
> drivers, not a half-backed piece of software that you will be
> striving to upgrade. So even if Java7s are still there, they could
> be well served. But newer versions could be developed for Java8+
> and encourage users to upgrade to a non-EOLed Java platform, and
> probably as a side-effect get better performance.
>
> OK, but the scenario where people are using the latest version of
> Postgres with SCRAM and still using older versions of java is what I
> am thinking about. I wonder if SCRAM will get backpatched ?

If developed for Java8+, it won't (at least, I won't do it).

However, I wonder if it would be such a big deal for people that
are upgrading to Postgres 10 and require SCRAM not to ask them to
upgrade their JVM to a non EOLed version. I think the intersection of
people who go for very modern PG and non supported Java if almost 0.

Regards,

Álvaro

>
>
> Dave Cramer
>
> davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com <mailto:davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com>
> www.postgresintl.com <http://www.postgresintl.com/>
>

--

Álvaro Hernández Tortosa

-----------
<8K>data