Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes - Mailing list pgsql-docs
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200407252355.i6PNtoc13198@candle.pha.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Responses |
Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes
|
List | pgsql-docs |
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sun, 2004-07-25 at 05:25, Bruce Momjian 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. > > > > Looks good. These take time and effort, much appreciated. > > Forward-looking phrases > ======================= > > Overall, I'd ask that we don't refer back to what earlier releases > didn't do, or whatever limitations they were thought to have. > > If a release has "new feature X", everybody can work out it wasn't there > in the last release. The phrasing is delicate so you describe the new > thing without running down the old. > > e.g. (1) > > Previous releases required the Unix emulation toolkit Cygwin for Win32 > support. > > to > > The server no longer relies upon Cygwin for Unix emulation under win32. > > e.g. (2) > > Prior release had no such capability; there was no way to recover from a > statement failure in a transaction. > > to > > Should a statement fail inside a transaction, there is now a way to > handle this error and continue processing. > > (Of course, somebody will let me know about my Brit-style passive voice, > I'm sure...) I understand your reason for making these changes. However, I am unsure if your new wording is as clear as the previous one. Our reliance on Cygwin and inability to prevent an error from aborting a transaction were limitation and it seems clearer to just state that we have fixed them rather than try to sugar-code our previous limitations. Marketing-wise, I think you are right, but from an honesty/clarity perspective, I think the current wording is better. What I could do is remove some of the later references where we were talking updating the system catalog to do various things. I am not sure it is needed. Comments? > > Migration > ========= > These release notes refer to "GUC"s, whereas the previous release notes > and the manual refers to "server configuration parameters". I understand > the former, but prefer the latter description for these user-focused > notes. Updated. > Also, it might be worth mentioning that pg_dump itself has also been > substantially improved, and now provides an improved upgrade path for > existing users. It is mentioned as the top item in the pg_dump section. It doesn't seem like a migration issue to me though. Is it a major feature? > Here's my attempt at a short paragraph for PITR... > > Point-In-Time Recovery enhances Data Resilience > > PostgreSQL can now recover from total disk failure using backups and > transaction log archives. Recovery can be controlled to stop at a > specified point in time or at some transaction in the past. Transaction > log archiving is automated and calls a user-supplied external program to > allow integration with external backup devices and related software. We can improve the wording, but if the motivation is to reduced saying bad things about our previous functionality, let me explain my perspective. Basically, my goal with these release notes is to make it as clear as possible why this new feature would be valuable to the reader. If it makes our previous release look bad, so be it. For me, clarity and candor gain a lot more credibility than trying to cover over missing functionality in the past. I am not saying we have to be so honest that we bash PostgreSQL, but in cases where we adjust wording to try to prevent ourselves from looking bad, it is best to be honest and clear about our limitations. I think in the long run it gains us lots of credibility (and ultimately volunteers). > > > Do people want a big-picture paragraph at the top talking about the > > release? Some releases get them, some don't, but this one could if > > folks want it. > > > > Yes, thats a good idea. OK. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
pgsql-docs by date: