Re: [rdf4j-dev] RDF4J 6

[Jerven Tjalling Bolleman <jerven.bolleman@sib.swiss>]

Hi All,

I concur with the wish to move to Java25.

I also wish to pick up the vectorized binding sets etc. as well as 
improving the placement regarding where the bindingsets are created 
(moving from the QueryContext to the prior QueryEvaluationSteps).

Another subtle change is that I wish that we had a single UNDEF value to 
avoid the difficulty between figuring out if a null means empty or 
undef. Which can lead to subtle issues and makes the bindingsets bigger 
than they need to be.

Also if we find that during the development of 6 we find we need to 
deprecate more I would not there being a 5.4.0 with just more 
deprecation notices.

Next to the SOLR store deprecation, I personally would not mind 
deprecating the elasticsearch-store as well, and the original mapdb
implementation.

Regards,
Jerven

On 12/16/25 11:06, Piotr Sowiński via rdf4j-dev wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm very much in favor of moving on to RDF4J 6 right after 5.3.
>
> For RDF4J 6 my first wish is to upgrade to as new JDK version as 
> possible (preferably 25), to allow us to use the many new Java features 
> to further improve performance.
>
> I would also suggest to consider if any changes to public APIs in the 
> query engine are needed (around BindingSets) to support processing 
> queries with lower overhead (e.g., raw value IDs), or with batches of 
> bindings (vectorized).
> We could also reconsider mutability of some classes in the engine (e.g., 
> values, statements, binding sets). Moving to immutable records today 
> could already offer small performance improvements. But more 
> importantly, this would be a first step to supporting Valhalla value 
> classes, when they finally are released.
> I think some time ago there was some work in the engine to support 
> iterations with a specific order, but this is still experimental – this 
> could be taken further, perhaps?
>
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 at 22:22, Håvard Ottestad via rdf4j-dev <rdf4j- 
> dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone!
>
>     I’m wondering what people think about having 5.3.0 be the last minor
>     release of RDF4J and move to 6.0.0 on the develop branch after that?
>
>     Anything we want to remove in 6.0.0 needs to be deprecated in 5.3.0.
>     I’m going to deprecate the entire Solr sail for removal because Solr
>     is very far behind on updates and will hold us back from updating to
>     the latest Lucene and Jakarta EE versions.
>
>     I’ve release 5.2.2 today and plan to publish a milestone build of
>     5.3.0 as soon as I can.
>
>     Cheers,
>     Håvard
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     rdf4j-dev mailing list
>     rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>     To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/
>     mailman/listinfo/rdf4j-dev <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/
>     listinfo/rdf4j-dev>
>
>
>
> --
> Piotr Sowiński
> CTO & Co-Founder @ NeverBlink
> https://neverblink.eu <https://neverblink.eu>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rdf4j-dev mailing list
> rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rdf4j-dev