Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed
Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: add AFTER trigger user change item
- 73e26cbeb592 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: modify async I/O item for other improvements
- 03c53a73141a 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: split apart log_connections item
- a1de1b0833b8 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: move ANALYZE item,split ANALYZE/EXPLAIN item
- bf6034d00dd4 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: clarify multiplication item
- c861092b0e0f 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: add removal details to MD5 item
- 3e782ca32225 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: fix markup
- 08b8aa174840 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: clarify btree skip-scan item
- 44ce4e1593b1 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: update to current
- 1ca583f6c0f9 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust CREATE SUBSCRIPTION attribution
- 883339c170d1 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: clarify btree skip scan item
- 7ddfac79f2cd 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: mv. hash joins and GROUP BY item to General
- 99ddf8615c21 18.0 landed
-
Add support for runtime arguments in injection points
- 371f2db8b05e 18.0 cited
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: fix missing parens for crc32c()
- 89372d0aaa4a 18.0 landed
-
PG 18 relnotes: adjust RETURNING new/old item
- 9d710a1ac091 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust pg_log_backend_memory_contexts()
- 9fef27a83b31 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: add pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() mention
- f8d49aa130b2 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust pgbench per-script reporting item
- 69aca072ebf6 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: mention GROUP SET fixes
- 3bd5271729c5 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust partition planning item
- b560ce7884a3 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: small adjustments regarding options
- ada78f9bef2e 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: move partition locking item to General Perf
- 575f6003eddb 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust partition items
- 45750c6cfe8d 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: reword OAuth item
- c0e6aace02b6 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: add mention of pg_stat_reset_backend_stats()
- 0de2e1c8b542 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust hash item
- 092e72a93023 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: split partition optimizer item into two
- cf847d6340a6 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust COPY and REJECT_LIMIT items
- b3754dcc9ff7 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: move and clarify constraint items
- d83981c24be7 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: add commit for cancel key and protocol neg.
- 8c9eec540dc4 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: fix libpq wording
- a675149e8770 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: add GROUP BY column elimination item
- 24987c6f0687 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: move protocol version item to "server"
- 04b269da56db 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: adjust libpq trace & potocol version items
- 9f8fcadb2087 18.0 landed
-
doc PG 18 relnotes: reword and reorder items
- aa82ebdc2970 18.0 landed
-
doc: Fix memory context level in pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() example.
- 706cbed35103 18.0 cited
-
Make levels 1-based in pg_log_backend_memory_contexts()
- d9e03864b6b4 18.0 cited
-
Introduce file_copy_method setting.
- f78ca6f3ebbb 18.0 cited
-
libpq: Handle NegotiateProtocolVersion message differently
- 5070349102af 18.0 cited
-
Add timingsafe_bcmp(), for constant-time memory comparison
- 09be39112654 18.0 cited
-
Optimization for lower(), upper(), casefold() functions.
- 27bdec06841d 18.0 cited
-
Fix ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET PUBLICATION ... command.
- 7c99dc587a01 18.0 cited
-
Add connection establishment duration logging
- 18cd15e706ac 18.0 cited
-
Modularize log_connections output
- 9219093cab26 18.0 cited
-
Ensure that AFTER triggers run as the instigating user.
- 01463e1cccd3 18.0 cited
-
Detect redundant GROUP BY columns using UNIQUE indexes
- bd10ec529796 18.0 cited
-
Move cancel key generation to after forking the backend
- 9d9b9d46f3c5 18.0 cited
On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 12:18 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 07:46:11PM +0900, Richard Guo wrote: > > On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 5:41 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > > On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 03:03:32PM +0900, Richard Guo wrote: > > > > I'm wondering if we should consider mentioning that several > > > > long-standing issues related to grouping sets have been fixed starting > > > > from PostgreSQL v18. I understand that we typically don't include bug > > > > fixes in the release notes, but these particular issues have been > > > > present since grouping sets were first introduced, and currently they > > > > still exist in the back branches (yeah, for some reason we do not have > > > > back-branch fixes; we only fix them in v18 and going forward). > > > > > > > > There have been complaints from users about grouping sets giving > > > > incorrect results in certain cases, which has made them hesitant to > > > > use PostgreSQL for analytical workloads. Since these issues are fixed > > > > in v18, it might be worthwhile to point this out — if only to reassure > > > > users that these issues are no longer a concern going forward. > > > > > > > > (FWIW, the related commits are 247dea89f, f5050f795, and cc5d98525). > > > > > > Agreed, any fix that commonly used to return wrong results should be > > > mentioned. Applied patch attached. > > > > I'm not sure whether it's appropriate to put the incorrect-result > > fixes under the item "Allow some HAVING clauses on GROUPING SETS to > > be pushed to WHERE clauses", since that item is an optimization and > > does not fix these incorrect-result issues. > > > > But I'm also unsure where else they should go. Would it make sense to > > list them as a new item instead? > > I put it there because that is the only mention of GROUPING SETS. If we > create a separate item, would the text just be "This release fixes > some GROUPING SETS queries that used to return incorrect results." Is > there any pattern to the fix? Seems NULLs or subqueries were involved. > Is this an incompatibility? Could people be relying on the old > behavior? I think there are two patterns here: * 247dea89f and cc5d98525 fix cases where grouping expressions fail to match lower-level target items due to expression preprocessing or subquery pull-up. Subqueries are one example of such expressions. * f5050f795 fixes cases where some seemingly redundant grouping or ordering expressions were incorrectly ignored, without recognizing that they could be nulled by grouping sets. I don't think this constitutes an incompatibility, and it's unlikely that anyone is relying on the old behavior, as it was clearly incorrect. (I realize these descriptions are too technical, but I'm not sure how to express them in a more user-facing way.) Thanks Richard