Re: Release Note Changes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Usama Dar
Subject Re: Release Note Changes
Date
Msg-id ff0e67090711300208p3ceb0dbbt35bf614df49e16f1@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Release Note Changes  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Release Note Changes  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Release Note Changes  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


On 11/30/07, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

"Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

> If people understand there aren't 13 performance improvements there are
> at *least* 19+ that is a positive message to help people decide to
> upgrade.

Frankly I think the release notes are already too long. People who judge a
release by counting the number of items in the release notes are not worth
appeasing. Including every individual lock removed or code path optimized will
only obscure the important points on which people should be judging the
relevance of the release to them. Things like smoothing checkpoint i/o which
could be removing a show-stopper problem for them.

If they're mentioned at all a single release note bullet point saying "Many
optimizations and concurrency improvements in areas such as transaction start
and finish, checkpoint start, record visibility checking, merge join plans,
..." would suffice.

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB           http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

i agree that release notes should not be too long, but may be there should be (if there isn't one already) something like a "change log" where people can find out all the changes done from the previous release, if they are intrested ?

--
Usama Munir Dar http://linkedin.com/in/usamadar
Consultant Architect
Cell:+92 321 5020666
Skype: usamadar

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Release Note Changes
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Empty arrays with ARRAY[]