Re: First draft of PG 17 release notes

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: First draft of PG 17 release notes
Date: 2024-09-11 14:12:58
Message-ID: ZuGlauZY4rPTqPVv@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 09:52:42AM -0700, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 11:29 PM Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Sept 2024 at 04:47, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > > Yes. There are so many changes at the source code level it is unwise to
> > > try and get them into the main release notes. If someone wants to
> > > create an addendum, like was suggested for pure performance
> > > improvements, that would make sense.
> >
> > I agree that the release notes cannot fit every change. But I also
> > don't think any extension author reads the complete git commit log
> > every release, so taking the stance that they should be seems
> > unhelpful. And the "Source Code" section does exist so at some level
> > you seem to disagree with that too. So what is the way to decide that
> > something makes the cut for the "Source Code" section?
> >
> > I think as an extension author there are usually three types of
> > changes that are relevant:
> > 1. New APIs/hooks that are meant for extension authors
> > 2. Stuff that causes my existing code to not compile anymore
> > 3. Stuff that changes behaviour of existing APIs code in a
> > incompatible but silent way
> >
> > For 1, I think adding them to the release notes makes total sense,
> > especially if the new APIs are documented not only in source code, but
> > also on the website. Nathan his change is of this type, so I agree
> > with him it should be in the release notes.
>
> +1. I think that the increment JSON parser that is already mentioned
> in the release note would fall in this type too; it's not a feature
> aimed just for extension authors, but it's kind of source and internal
> changes IMO. Since the DSM registry feature is described in the doc, I
> think it would make sense to have it in the release notes and probably
> has a link to the "Requesting Shared Memory After Startup" section.

This commit?

commit 8b2bcf3f287
Author: Nathan Bossart <nathan(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Date: Fri Jan 19 14:24:36 2024 -0600

Introduce the dynamic shared memory registry.

Yes, we have time to add it.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

When a patient asks the doctor, "Am I going to die?", he means
"Am I going to die soon?"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2024-09-11 14:16:04 Re: Detailed release notes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-09-11 14:11:05 Re: Document DateStyle effect on jsonpath string()