Horton

Re: First draft of PG 17 release notes

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2024-09-11T14:12:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Revert support for ALTER TABLE ... MERGE/SPLIT PARTITION(S) commands

  2. When creating materialized views, use REFRESH to load data.

  3. Revert temporal primary keys and foreign keys

  4. Avoid needless large memcpys in libpq socket writing

  5. Enhance nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution.

  6. Introduce a non-recursive JSON parser

  7. Combine freezing and pruning steps in VACUUM

  8. Allow SIGINT to cancel psql database reconnections.

  9. Provide API for streaming relation data.

  10. Add hash support functions and hash opclass for contrib/ltree.

  11. Pull up ANY-SUBLINK with the necessary lateral support.

  12. Read WAL directly from WAL buffers.

  13. Introduce the dynamic shared memory registry.

  14. Add macros for looping through a List without a ListCell.

  15. Support +/- infinity in the interval data type.

  16. Extend ALTER OPERATOR to allow setting more optimization attributes.

  17. Consider cheap startup paths in add_paths_to_append_rel

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@jeltef.nl> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Sept 2024 at 04:47, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.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@postgresql.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@momjian.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?"