Hi Dmitri, The bootstrap tool allows users to specify the schema version. It's debatable whether we should allow that or not in the future, but that's a separate discussion.
-v, --schema-version=<schema version> # The version of the schema to load in [1, 2, 3, LATEST]. https://polaris.apache.org/releases/1.5.0/admin-tool/#bootstrapping-realms-and-principal-credentials Yufei On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 11:53 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Yufei, > > I'm not sure I understand what you mean, sorry. > > For example, a user installed Polaris 1.3.0-incubating (latest schema v3), > then upgraded to 1.4.0 (latest schema v4). Why would the user run schema > DDL for v3 using the 1.4.0 release binaries? > > Thanks, > Dmitri. > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 2:34 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Do we have use cases for deploying old schema versions from the latest > > Polaris release? > > > > Yes, this happens every time a user upgrades their Polaris version. > > Backward compatibility is critical in that case. > > > > Yufei > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 10:33 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > Maintaining only the latest schema for H2 makes sense to me. > > > > > > I wonder why we should not do the same for PostgreSQL too. > > > > > > End users can always deploy older schemas using corresponding (old) > > Polaris > > > releases if they need to. > > > > > > Do we have use cases for deploying old schema versions from the latest > > > Polaris release? > > > > > > That is not to say we should not support old schema versions in java > > code - > > > that is still relevant in upgrade cases. I wonder only about > boostrapping > > > with older DDL. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 1:02 PM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry I forgot to mention this: I am not sure why we maintain > > > > versioned schemas for H2? The rare use cases where H2 makes sense in > > > > production (embedded db, ephemeral data, etc.) do not apply to > > > > Polaris. How about we consider H2 as a testing-only backend, and > > > > reduce the supported schemas to just the latest version? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 6:38 PM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Dmitri, I was about to chime in here :-) > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I would actually support the opposite: make JDBC+H2 the > default > > > > > for getting-started guides (thus shipping H2 by default). > > > > > > > > > > As I explained in the other thread, JDBC+H2 is a superior setup, > much > > > > > closer to a real production one, compared to the test-grade > > > > > TreeMapMetaStore-based persistence that we use as the default > today. > > > > > > > > > > Granted, we'd have to maintain schemas for H2. But on the bright > > side, > > > > > we don't need to care about schema migration, so I am not too > worried > > > > > about the overhead. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 6:03 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > To refresh this thread, I think Alex has a nice proposal [1] to > > > > actually > > > > > > use H2 instead of in-memory persistence by default in > > getting-started > > > > > > scenarios. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nzoljc1ohnsq4f5o28dh4opqkqw3p09h > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 2:23 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the purpose is mostly for test/local "demo" purposes > > > without > > > > the > > > > > > > need of RDBMS service. > > > > > > > That said, with Docker, it's not very painful to have > PostgreSQL > > > > including > > > > > > > for local test/demo use cases. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree to remove H2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 7:08 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm just wondering whether people find value in maintaining > H2 > > > > schemas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I doubt H2 has production use cases. Polaris builds include > it > > > > only in > > > > > > > test > > > > > > > > configurations, it seems. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it be reasonable to drop H2 to concentrate on > PostgreSQL? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
