Apologies for not getting back at this earlier. I somehow missed this email thread. To conclude the discussion we ended up doing the following : [1] The service tests run with JDBC / in-memory persistence [2] Admin tests (JDBC / EclipseLink persistence)
Again thanks a ton everyone ! for your feedback and work ! Given that now we have achieved *Deprecate Eclipse Link and make Relational JDBC as default* via our docs and getting started etc reflect that very well ! I wanted to bring closing this issue as well : https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/777#top As we no longer endorse Eclipse link which is where this originated from and the current JDBC the default persistence is very much permissive of the concurrent workload as demonstrated by : https://lists.apache.org/thread/bz80l2fhtbfz3pqyfqp1c39ymmyqkc85 Please let me know you thoughts considering the same ^^^ Best, Prashant Singh On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 8:59 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> wrote: > I'd propose to convert all existing tests that use a Postgres database to > JDBC. > > Then (in the same PR) add dedicated integration tests for EclipseLink > following the same approach that was used for JDBC ITs. > > This ensures that EclipseLink is covered by the normative Polaris > "integration-tests". At the same time, all tests that are not normative > from the Persistence perspective (perhaps they test something else... I did > not check), use the new default persistence (JDBC). > > WDYT? > > Thanks, > Dmitri. > > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:48 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Hi > > > > My point is that we should have tests for both EclipseLink and JDBC > > (parameterized). > > I think it's acceptable to have "longer tests", just to be sure > > EclipseLink still works fine (waiting to remove it). > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 12:17 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > Good point about tests! > > > > > > However, I believe it still makes sense to transfer the main body of > > tests > > > using a "real database" to JDBC. It should be possible to run one > > > Integration test on EclipseLink to make sure it works and still not > > > overload CI. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 1:26 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > I already commented on the PR and forgot to reply here :) > > > > > > > > Yes agree to deprecate eclipselink it makes sense to me and promote > > > > "JDBC" instead. > > > > > > > > That said, as said in the PR, I think we should keep the eclipselink > > > > test still (even if deprecated): deprecation gives time for users to > > > > "move to" JDBC but they can still use eclipselink, so it makes sense > > > > to test it to be sure it works and there's no regression here. > > > > > > > > Just my $0.01 :) > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > JB > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 11:59 PM Prashant Singh > > > > <prashant.si...@snowflake.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > I’d like to get your thoughts on deprecating EclipseLink and making > > JDBC > > > > > the default for our persistence layer. > > > > > > > > > > Our current EclipseLink setup mandates execution within a > > transaction, > > > > > which has introduced several issues — notably, an improper > > implementation > > > > > of CAS (compare-and-swap) semantics. To address these shortcomings, > > > > Apache > > > > > Polaris underwent a major refactor to decouple persistence > interfaces > > > > from > > > > > strict transaction dependencies and to ensure actual CAS > enforcement. > > > > > > > > > > As part of this effort, we introduced a new JDBC backend with a > > simpler > > > > and > > > > > more performant schema, directly addressing the limitations of the > > > > existing > > > > > EclipseLink schema. > > > > > > > > > > We’ve observed significant improvements compared to the EclipseLink > > > > > implementation. Notably, issues such as Polaris failing under > minimal > > > > > concurrency (e.g., with just 5 users) have been resolved: > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1123#issuecomment-2756133924 > > > > > > > > > > Given these improvements, I propose we: > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > Deprecate EclipseLink > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > Make relational JDBC the default persistence implementation > > > > > > > > > > PR to support this change: > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1515 > > > > > > > > > > Would love to hear your feedback on this. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > >
