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.
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 |