hey Gal and Eric, nothing has changed since reef, and we're still using the ancient arrow version 6.0.1 for this submodule. can we please choose a more recent version and pull up the submodule? an issue was recently raised in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/52629 where the arrow build fails due to https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/15281 which was fixed in arrow 14.0. can we use that? On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Kaleb Keithley <kkeithle(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Just to expand a bit. For development purposes. > > As Casey says: > + EPEL9 has libarrow-9 > > If you're developing on RHEL8 or CentOS 8: > + EPEL8 has libarrow-8 (requires installing subversion-devel module and utf8proc-devel from the module) > > And if you're developing on Fedora: > + Fedora 38 and f39/rawhide are getting libarrow-11 now > + Fedora 37 has libarrow-9 > + Fedora 36 has libarrow-8 > + Fedora 35 (EOL) has nothing > > (I originally thought 9, 10, and 11 were released closer together than they actually are. Although 6-8 weeks between them is still a lot of churn IMO. Independent of that, there's still an opportunity to leave Fedora 38 on libarrow-10 if it makes sense to have libarrow-10 available in a Fedora release.) > > I dare say "we" could build ORC and Arrow .debs for Ubuntu in a Launchpad PPA. Would that be useful or usable? I.e. could teuthology consume packages from a PPA? (Pretty sure I don't want to own that though. Def don't want to be the only owner of it.) > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 2:17 PM Casey Bodley <cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote: >> >> hey Gal and Eric, >> >> in today's standup, we discussed the version of our apache arrow >> submodule. it's currently pinned at 6.0.1, which was tagged in nov. >> 2021. the centos9 builds are using the system package >> libarrow-devel-9.0.0. arrow's upstream recently tagged an 11.0.0 >> release >> >> as far as i know, there still aren't any system packages for ubuntu, >> so we're likely to be stuck with the submodule for quite a while. how >> do guys want to handle these updates? is it worth trying to update >> before the reef release? >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io >> To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io >> > > > -- > > Kaleb

hey Gal and Eric, nothing has changed since reef, and we're still using the ancient arrow version 6.0.1 for this submodule. can we please choose a more recent version and pull up the submodule? an issue was recently raised in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/52629 where the arrow build fails due to https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/15281 which was fixed in arrow 14.0. can we use that? On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Kaleb Keithley <kkeithle@redhat.com<mailto:kkeithle@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Just to expand a bit. For development purposes. > > As Casey says: > + EPEL9 has libarrow-9 > > If you're developing on RHEL8 or CentOS 8: > + EPEL8 has libarrow-8 (requires installing subversion-devel module and utf8proc-devel from the module) > > And if you're developing on Fedora: > + Fedora 38 and f39/rawhide are getting libarrow-11 now > + Fedora 37 has libarrow-9 > + Fedora 36 has libarrow-8 > + Fedora 35 (EOL) has nothing > > (I originally thought 9, 10, and 11 were released closer together than they actually are. Although 6-8 weeks between them is still a lot of churn IMO. Independent of that, there's still an opportunity to leave Fedora 38 on libarrow-10 if it makes sense to have libarrow-10 available in a Fedora release.) > > I dare say "we" could build ORC and Arrow .debs for Ubuntu in a Launchpad PPA. Would that be useful or usable? I.e. could teuthology consume packages from a PPA? (Pretty sure I don't want to own that though. Def don't want to be the only owner of it.) > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 2:17 PM Casey Bodley <cbodley@redhat.com<mailto:cbodley@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> hey Gal and Eric, >> >> in today's standup, we discussed the version of our apache arrow >> submodule. it's currently pinned at 6.0.1, which was tagged in nov. >> 2021. the centos9 builds are using the system package >> libarrow-devel-9.0.0. arrow's upstream recently tagged an 11.0.0 >> release >> >> as far as i know, there still aren't any system packages for ubuntu, >> so we're likely to be stuck with the submodule for quite a while. how >> do guys want to handle these updates? is it worth trying to update >> before the reef release? >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list -- dev@ceph.io<mailto:dev@ceph.io> >> To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@ceph.io<mailto:dev-leave@ceph.io> >> > > > -- > > Kaleb

I’m happy to update my code to track a later version. What version would you prefer to go to, Gal? Eric (he/him) On Feb 5, 2024, at 12:05 PM, Gal Salomon &lt;gsalomon(a)ibm.com&gt; wrote: i had checked version 10 on fedora 38 (the standalone application) it seems ok beyond that(version 10) some of arrow API's are modified (it breaks the build) ________________________________ From: Casey Bodley &lt;cbodley(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Monday, February 5, 2024 6:57 PM To: Eric Ivancich &lt;ivancich(a)ibm.com&gt;om>; Gal Salomon &lt;gsalomon(a)ibm.com&gt; Cc: dev(a)ceph.io &lt;dev(a)ceph.io&gt;io>; Gal Salomon &lt;gsalomon(a)redhat.com&gt;om>; Eric Ivancich &lt;ivancich(a)redhat.com&gt;om>; Kaleb Keithley &lt;kkeithle(a)redhat.com&gt; Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: arrow submodule version bump! On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:38 AM Casey Bodley &lt;cbodley(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: