[WIP][DO-NOT-MERGE] Upgrade rocksjni to 8.9.1 #44674
Closed
+2
−2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Oops, closing as there is existing work in SPARK-45110 to upgrade to 8.8.1, which is already doing plenty of validation. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
rocksjnidependency to 8.9.1Why are the changes needed?
Due to the performance regression in JDK 17 attach/detach calls, JDK 17 Structured Streaming workloads that stress RocksDB also experience a performance regression. We plan to mitigate this issue by writing RocksDB logs to
stderrinstead of the JVM Log4J logger, as implemented in this RocksDB PR.However, as that will likely come out in RocksDB 8.10, we'd like to incrementally upgrade to verify that there aren't issues with bumping all the way from 8.3.2 to 8.9.1.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
WIP. Likely:
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No