Thread: Win32 release warning
I have shortened your paragraph to:
Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs
than other supported platforms in this release. Please
test it thoroughly before using it in production.
and made the change in release.sgml. Do we need more?
Other wording I considered was:
"we expect this port not to be as bug-free as other supported platforms"
but that is close to a double-negative.
In adding this now, I would also like to see a notice in a future
release at the point we think Win32 is as bug-free as Unix (or as
bug-free as the platform allows). (And this might happen in a minor
8.0.X release.)
Again, my concern about this stuff is that you later have to undo what
you said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > What text are people suggesting?
>
> How do people feel about the attached doc patch?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neil
>
> Index: doc/src/sgml/release.sgml
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /Users/neilc/local/cvs/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/release.sgml,v
> retrieving revision 1.288
> diff -c -r1.288 release.sgml
> *** doc/src/sgml/release.sgml 24 Aug 2004 00:06:50 -0000 1.288
> --- doc/src/sgml/release.sgml 26 Aug 2004 05:43:32 -0000
> ***************
> *** 28,47 ****
> <listitem>
> <para>
> This is the first <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
> ! release to natively run on Microsoft Windows as a server. It
> ! can run as a Windows service. This release supports NT-based
> ! Windows releases like Win2000, XP, Win2003. Older releases
> ! like Windows 95, 98, and ME are not supported because these
> ! operating systems do not have the infrastructure to support
> ! <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>. A separate installer
> ! project has been created to ease installation on Windows:
> <ulink url="http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller">
> http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller</ulink>.
> </para>
> ! <para>
> ! Previous releases required the Unix emulation toolkit Cygwin for
> ! Win32 server support. <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
> ! has always supported clients on Win32.
> </para>
> </listitem>
> </varlistentry>
> --- 28,65 ----
> <listitem>
> <para>
> This is the first <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
> ! release to natively run on Microsoft Windows as a server. This
> ! release supports Windows 2000, XP, and 2003. Older releases of
> ! Windows are not supported because they lack the infrastructure
> ! necessary to support <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>. A
> ! separate installer project has been created to allow for easy
> ! installation on Windows:
> <ulink url="http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller">
> http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller</ulink>.
> </para>
> !
> ! <warning>
> ! <para>
> ! This is the first release of <productname>PostgreSQL</> to
> ! natively support Win32. As a result, the Windows port of
> ! <productname>PostgreSQL</> is less mature and likely less
> ! stable than <productname>PostgreSQL</> on Unix. While we have
> ! done our best to produce a high-quality release for Windows,
> ! users accustomed to the stability and maturity of
> ! <productname>PostgreSQL</> on Unix may not be satisfied by
> ! the current state of <productname>PostgreSQL</> on
> ! Windows. We expect the maturity of the Windows port to
> ! significantly increase in the future. We encourage all
> ! prospective users of <productname>PostgreSQL</> on Windows to
> ! carefully evaluate the database system before putting it into
> ! production use.
> ! </para>
> ! </warning>
> !
> ! <para>
> ! Previous releases required the Unix emulation toolkit Cygwin
> ! for Win32 server support. <productname>PostgreSQL</> has
> ! supported clients on Win32 for a long time.
> </para>
> </listitem>
> </varlistentry>
--
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
Bruce Momjian wrote: >I have shortened your paragraph to: > > Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms > supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs > than other supported platforms in this release. Please > test it thoroughly before using it in production. > >and made the change in release.sgml. Do we need more? > > > I don't much like "might have more bugs". Perhaps "might be less robust" or "might be less stable"? cheers andrew
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> I have shortened your paragraph to: >> >> Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms >> supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs >> than other supported platforms in this release. Please >> test it thoroughly before using it in production. >> >> and made the change in release.sgml. Do we need more? >> >> >> > > I don't much like "might have more bugs". Perhaps "might be less robust" > or "might be less stable"? "lacks the extended testing"? Or even "we don't have an extended track-record on this platform". -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote: > "lacks the extended testing"? That's good. We don't need to focus on bugs. The word bug and postgresql should never occur in the same sentence... hmm... -- /Dennis Björklund
OK, new wording:
Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
supported in previous releases, it has not been tested as
extensively as other supported platforms in this release. Please
test it thoroughly before using it in production.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote:
>
> > "lacks the extended testing"?
>
> That's good. We don't need to focus on bugs. The word bug and postgresql
> should never occur in the same sentence... hmm...
>
> --
> /Dennis Bj?rklund
>
--
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
That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go through all the tests or something. How about "it does not have the extensive testing history that other supported platforms in this release have." Later Rob > > OK, new wording: > > Because Win32 is significantly different > from the Unix platforms > supported in previous releases, it has not > been tested as > extensively as other supported platforms in > this release. Please > test it thoroughly before using it in > production. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Dennis Bjorklund wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote: > > > > > "lacks the extended testing"? > > > > That's good. We don't need to focus on bugs. The > word bug and postgresql > > should never occur in the same sentence... hmm... > > > > -- > > /Dennis Bj?rklund > > > > -- > 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 > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> through all the tests or something.
> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> history that other supported platforms in this release
> have."
Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point
out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
suspicious of.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes: >> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level >> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go >> through all the tests or something. > >> How about "it does not have the extensive testing >> history that other supported platforms in this release >> have." > > Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new > platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point > out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be > suspicious of. "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution as you would a new product" ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Tom Lane wrote:
> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> > That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> > of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> > through all the tests or something.
>
> > How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> > history that other supported platforms in this release
> > have."
>
> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point
> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> suspicious of.
Agreed, but savepoints probably has more code. Do we warn about that
too?
I agree there is a disconnect between the initial clause and the testing
part, and mentioning the code actually does fix that, so new wording is:
Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
supported in previous releases, there is much new Win32-specific
code that has not been tested extensively. Please test it
thoroughly before using it in production.
Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix
platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as
Unix.
--
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
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> >> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> >> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> >> through all the tests or something.
> >
> >> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> >> history that other supported platforms in this release
> >> have."
> >
> > Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> > platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point
> > out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> > suspicious of.
>
> "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not have
> the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix platforms,
> and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution as you
> would a new product"
Wow, that is good! Current wording is:
Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
supported in previous releases, there is much new Win32-specific
code that has not been tested extensively. Please test it
thoroughly before using it in production.
Should I change it to Marc's version?
--
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
> > Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix > platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as > Unix. Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get. Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the primary platform. Forget I brought it up. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix > > platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as > > Unix. > > > Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the > first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it > in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get. > > Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the > primary platform. Forget I brought it up. I think there is concern that if the Win32 port is buggy that it will give the project a bad reputation. It will probably be distributed to many who have never used PostgreSQL before. -- 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
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level >>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go >>> through all the tests or something. >> >> >>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing >>> history that other supported platforms in this release >>> have." >> >> >> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new >> platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point >> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be >> suspicious of. > > > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of > caution as you would a new product" > > Not bad. I think I'd say " ... does not have the benefit of years of use in production environments that PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms ..." - I agree with Merlin that we shouldn't imply it hasn't been extensively tested. cheers andrew
On Thursday 26 August 2004 12:56, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not > > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix > > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution > > as you would a new product" > Wow, that is good! > Should I change it to Marc's version? As long as 'although' is correctly spelled.... :-) -- Lamar Owen Director of Information Technology Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute 1 PARI Drive Rosman, NC 28772 (828)862-5554 www.pari.edu
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Thursday 26 August 2004 12:56, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>> "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not >>> have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix >>> platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution >>> as you would a new product" > >> Wow, that is good! >> Should I change it to Marc's version? > > As long as 'although' is correctly spelled.... :-) Ya ya, I'm lazy :) ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> >>> Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix >>> platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as >>> Unix. >> >> >> Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the >> first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it >> in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get. >> >> Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the >> primary platform. Forget I brought it up. > > I think there is concern that if the Win32 port is buggy that it will > give the project a bad reputation. It will probably be distributed to > many who have never used PostgreSQL before. Since I imagine 99.9% of Windows users are going to use pginstaller to install it ... has anyone looked into putting a WARNING pop up window as part of the install itself? Or does such already exist? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
OK, current text suggestion is:
Although tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
have the benefit of years of use in production environments that
PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms and therefore should be treated with
the same level of caution as you would a new product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> >>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> >>> through all the tests or something.
> >>
> >>
> >>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> >>> history that other supported platforms in this release
> >>> have."
> >>
> >>
> >> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> >> platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point
> >> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> >> suspicious of.
> >
> >
> > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
> > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix
> > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of
> > caution as you would a new product"
> >
> >
> Not bad. I think I'd say " ... does not have the benefit of years of use
> in production environments that PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms ..." -
> I agree with Merlin that we shouldn't imply it hasn't been extensively
> tested.
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
--
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
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >>> > >>> Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix > >>> platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as > >>> Unix. > >> > >> > >> Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the > >> first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it > >> in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get. > >> > >> Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the > >> primary platform. Forget I brought it up. > > > > I think there is concern that if the Win32 port is buggy that it will > > give the project a bad reputation. It will probably be distributed to > > many who have never used PostgreSQL before. > > Since I imagine 99.9% of Windows users are going to use pginstaller to > install it ... has anyone looked into putting a WARNING pop up window as > part of the install itself? Or does such already exist? There is already one for the beta. I don't see a need to add one for final release. -- 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
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > There is already one for the beta. I don't see a need to add one for > final release. Might be an idea ... if nothing else, something that at least reminds them about reporting bugs and where to do so? I'd hate to see 1000 ppl install, 90% see bugs adn never have them reported :( ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > There is already one for the beta. I don't see a need to add one for > > final release. > > Might be an idea ... if nothing else, something that at least reminds them > about reporting bugs and where to do so? I'd hate to see 1000 ppl > install, 90% see bugs adn never have them reported :( Yes, I was thinking of that, and of telling them they may need to upgrade more frequently than normal 8.0.0 users to fix win32 bugs as we find them. In fact, the idea I was thinking of is to have pginstaller update from current cvs more frequently than we make minor releases as we have done during beta. That way, people can get win32 fixes faster. Also, maybe we should encourage them to subscribe to announce so we can announce any Win32 fix releases we might need. They probably aren't used to that procedure. -- 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
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> >>> There is already one for the beta. I don't see a need to add one for >>> final release. >> >> Might be an idea ... if nothing else, something that at least reminds them >> about reporting bugs and where to do so? I'd hate to see 1000 ppl >> install, 90% see bugs adn never have them reported :( > > Yes, I was thinking of that, and of telling them they may need to > upgrade more frequently than normal 8.0.0 users to fix win32 bugs as we > find them. In fact, the idea I was thinking of is to have pginstaller > update from current cvs more frequently than we make minor releases as > we have done during beta. That way, people can get win32 fixes faster. > > Also, maybe we should encourage them to subscribe to announce so we can > announce any Win32 fix releases we might need. They probably aren't > used to that procedure. Having installed enough Windows software over the years (unfortunately), how about adding a 'register for annoucements' with a textbox to auto-subscribe to the list if they so choose? Instead of making them go through opening their mail reader and having to send off the message ... my experience with most Windows users is that 'the least amount of work required' means the most likely they will do it :( ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Bruce Momjian wrote: > OK, current text suggestion is: > > Although tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not > have the benefit of years of use in production environments that > PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms and therefore should be treated with > the same level of caution as you would a new product. What about: ... Unix like platforms ... Regards Gaetano Mendola
OK, release notes updated. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Momjian wrote: > > OK, current text suggestion is: > > Although tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not > have the benefit of years of use in production environments that > PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms and therefore should be treated with > the same level of caution as you would a new product. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > >> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes: > > >> > > >>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level > > >>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go > > >>> through all the tests or something. > > >> > > >> > > >>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing > > >>> history that other supported platforms in this release > > >>> have." > > >> > > >> > > >> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new > > >> platform-specific code for Windows in there. You want to point > > >> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be > > >> suspicious of. > > > > > > > > > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not > > > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix > > > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of > > > caution as you would a new product" > > > > > > > > Not bad. I think I'd say " ... does not have the benefit of years of use > > in production environments that PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms ..." - > > I agree with Merlin that we shouldn't imply it hasn't been extensively > > tested. > > > > cheers > > > > andrew > > > > -- > 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 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings > -- 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
After a long battle with technology, andrew@dunslane.net (Andrew Dunstan), an earthling, wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > >>I have shortened your paragraph to: >> >> Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms >> supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs >> than other supported platforms in this release. Please >> test it thoroughly before using it in production. >> >>and made the change in release.sgml. Do we need more? > > I don't much like "might have more bugs". Perhaps "might be less > robust" or "might be less stable"? How about: "We cannot be as confident in its stability as we are for other platforms that have been tested and supported across numerouspast releases." -- (reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.mca" "@" "enworbbc")) http://cbbrowne.com/info/rdbms.html Q: What does the function NULL do? A: The function NULL tests whether or not its argument is NIL or not. If its argument is NIL the value of NULL is NIL. -- Ken Tracton, Programmer's Guide to Lisp, page 73.