I have not kept up with jdk versions ...will try with jdk 11 and see if it 
addresses the high cpu issue. Thanks


> On Mar 23, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Jay Potharaju <jspothar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for that info Tim 
> 
>> On Mar 23, 2019, at 11:26 AM, Tim Underwood <timunderw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> We are successfully running Solr 7.6.0 (and 7.5.0 before it) on OpenJDK 11
>> without problems.  We are also using G1.  We do not use Solr Cloud but do
>> rely on the legacy replication.
>> 
>> -Tim
>> 
>> On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 10:13 AM Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I am, in fact, trying to get a summary of all this together, we’ll see how
>>> successful I am.
>>> 
>>> I can say that Solr is tested (and has been for quite some time) against
>>> JDK 8,9,10,11,12 and even 13. JDK9, from a 10,000 foot perspective, has a
>>> success rate in our automated tests that’s in line with all the other JDKs.
>>> 
>>> That said, people seem to be settling on JDK11 anecdotally, what’s your
>>> reason for using 9 .vs. 11?
>>> 
>>> Finally, there was one issue with JDK 9 and Kerberos that I’m unsure what
>>> the resolution is, if there is any. If you use Kerberos, be sure to test
>>> that first.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Erick
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 23, 2019, at 9:47 AM, Jay Potharaju <jspothar...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks I missed that info. Will try running with jdk9 and see if it
>>> addresses the issue.
>>>> Jay
>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mar 23, 2019, at 9:00 AM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 3/23/2019 8:12 AM, Jay Potharaju wrote:
>>>>>> Can I use java 9 with 7.7.0. I am planning to test if fixes issue with
>>> high cpu that I am running into.
>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129861
>>>>>> Was solr 7.7 tested with java 9?
>>>>> 
>>>>> The info for the 7.0.0 release said it was qualified with Java 9, so
>>> you should be fine running 7.7.x in Java 9 as well.  I do not know if it
>>> works with Java 10, 11, or 12.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shawn
>>> 
>>> 

Reply via email to