Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 items

> On Tue, Jun 08, 1999 at 07:32:41AM -0700, Don Baccus wrote:
> > I don't mean to this group, or any of the postgres groups,
> > I mean to the world at large, in which Postgres has a very
> > negative image for web work. Consistent dumps, killing
> > of one very bad memory leak (and a bunch of not-so-bad
> > ones), and moving to mvcc from table-locking - these are
> > three huge improvements for people building web sites.
> > Folks outside the normal Postgres community deserve to
> > know this.
>
> I have to agree with Don, and maybe try to offer an additional couple
> of notes. I think, and this is only me - not supported by any facts,
> that it would be useful having a highlights section in the release
> notes, since the efforts of the developers (of which I hope to be able
> to contribute too soon) make sure that each release results in *many*
> updates. I would propose classifying these updates into a number of
> categories, that would help users identify is (a) it is worth them
> updgrading and (maybe more important) (b) if it is worth them trying
> to use PGSQL now that "XYZ" has been fixed/implemented.
>
> A quick suggested list:
>
> 1. New features
> 2. Major Performance Updates
> 3. Major Bug Fixes
> 4. Security / Reliability Changes
> 5. Other
>
> Listing updates simple in reverse time order is too confusing.
>

Already done, on web site, and release notes. Sections are Bugs,
Enhancements, Source code changes.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026