Re: First draft of Beta announcement

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)berkus(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: First draft of Beta announcement
Date: 2017-05-12 17:03:15
Message-ID: c792fbd3-e0a8-d852-dbac-f3779175d29b@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On 05/12/2017 09:40 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh, Justin, Andres, Gunnar, Peter:
>

>> Most people won't know what that means. I can conclude that it means
>> that we can now connect to PostgreSQL and say, "please give me a read
>> only or a read/write host" but I am sure I am not 100% correct. I know
>> more about PostgreSQL than most who will care about this announcement.
>
> The idea is more to get people -- specifically driver and ORM authors --
> interested enough to bother looking up the feature. Not to describe it
> in full, which would take a paragraph.

Sure but still, the line doesn't really mean anything. Perhaps:

* Driver API for read only or read/write database routing? (I know
that's wrong but I think you know what I am getting at.

>> * WAL support for Hash Indexes
>>
>> Crash safe Hash Indexes or ACID compliant Hash Indexes.
>
> Crash safe is good.
>
>>
>> WAL is irrelevant in terms of the announcement.
>>
>> New "monitoring" roles for permission grants
>>
>> Is roles supposed to be plural?
>
> Yes.

Then let's list them with context. Something like:

New roles, x,y and z for monitoring purposes

>>
>> Push Down Aggregates to Foreign Servers
>>
>> What does this mean? (I know what it means), the majority of our readers
>> will not.
>
> If you can come up with a wording here which is clearer but takes one
> line, be my guest. I was unable to.

Planner support for aggregates on foreign (linked) tables

I added linked because it is a term that Oracle and MSSQL DBAs will get.

>> I don't think we need to say anything more than:
>>
>> Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a
>> list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release
>> notes).
>
> I disagree. As a rule, we don't break backwards compatibility so pg 10
> is going to be a shock to a lot of people. We really haven't seen this
> quantity of breakage since 8.3, which was released nine years ago, long
> before the majority of our current users were using Postgres. Given
> that -- because of partiitoning and logical replication -- many users
> will want to upgrade to 10 the month it comes out, I think we need to
> point out *in detail* why they will want to do extra testing. At a
> minimum, this includes the change in version numbering, the renaming of
> xlog to wal, and dropping support for FEBE 1.0.

We should point out IN EXCRUCIATING DETAIL, in the release notes.

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2017-05-12 17:08:06 Re: First draft of Beta announcement
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2017-05-12 16:40:01 Re: First draft of Beta announcement