Re: [DOCS] 7.5 release notes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruno Wolff III
Subject Re: [DOCS] 7.5 release notes
Date
Msg-id 20040725142937.GA5186@wolff.to
Whole thread Raw
In response to 7.5 release notes  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [DOCS] 7.5 release notes
Re: [DOCS] 7.5 release notes
Re: [DOCS] 7.5 release notes
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jul 25, 2004 at 00:25:43 -0400,
  Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote:
> I have completed the 7.5 release notes.  You can view them in HTML on
> the developer web page.  I have marked a few items with question marks
> that need to be addressed.  I am looking for improvements, even minor
> ones.  Either send in a patch or committers can modify the file
> directly.

There is a typo (transaction is misspelled) in the following line:
Prior release had no such capability; there was no way to recover from a statement failure in a transation. This

"match exactly" at the end of the following appears to be spurious:

Before this change some queries would not use an index if the data types did not exactly match. This improvement makes
indexusage more intuitive and consistent. match exactly 

In the following paragraph there appear to be two typos. I think
"optimizer make" should be "optimizer makes" and that "lose-source"
should be "closed-source".
 It is difficult to explain all the optimizer improvements that go into a release like this. They involve complex
adjustmentsto the logic used to select indexes, join methods, and join order. They are difficult to explain, but the
resultis that the optimizer make quicker and better choices in how to execute queries, resulting in improved
performance.The close relationship between our developers and users reporting problems allows us to make rapid and
complexoptimizer improvements that would be very difficult for lose-source companies to emulate. 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Garamond
Date:
Subject: postmaster.opts, moving datadir around, and pg_ctl
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: Planning for beta (was Re: Sketch of extending error