Re: "Immediate shutdown if postmaster.pid is removed" not mentioned in Release Notes

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "Immediate shutdown if postmaster.pid is removed" not mentioned in Release Notes
Date: 2015-12-16 23:08:05
Message-ID: CAKFQuwZw_eKeRDDPS6oO0jPTB8yY8vN+_nDopYgMG+s0TDoJbA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I noticed, that 9.5 release notes (beta2) do not mention
> > commit 7e2a18a9161fee7e67642863f72b51d77d3e996.
>
> We don't normally document back-patched patches in as-yet-unreleased
> branches, since the point of release notes is to tell you what's new
> compared to the previous release, and this item isn't (or won't be).
>
> Also, I doubt that this is of any great concern to the average user.
> It's not a scenario that would come up in anything I would call a
> supported use-case. If we're to reverse the aforementioned policy,
> there are probably quite a few patches that would now need to be
> documented as "new in 9.5" and are more significant than this.
>

​IOW, if you are familiar with how a previous version works you should keep
up with its release notes to catch a bug-fix behavior change like this.
Those who will end up learning on the upcoming release will simply learn
that this is how things work.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karl Czajkowski 2015-12-16 23:15:04 Check old and new tuple in row-level policy?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-12-16 22:42:11 Re: "Immediate shutdown if postmaster.pid is removed" not mentioned in Release Notes