Re: First-draft release notes for back-branch releases

Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Andrew Gierth (andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk) wrote:
>> Do we need to add anything in the release notes about possible
>> complications in upgrading caused by the 65f39408ee71 / 56535dcdc9e2
>> issue?
>>
>> If upgrading from the immediately prior point releases to this one, then
>> the shutdown of the previous version might have left an incorrect min
>> recovery point in pg_control, yes? So the error could then occur when
>> starting the new version, even though the bug is now apparently fixed.

> Based on the discussion on IRC and Andrew's comments above, it seems to
> me like we should really highlight this. Would be nice if we could
> include some information about what to do if someone is bit by this
> also...

You could be bit by any shutdown of the old code, no, whether it's
part of a pg_upgrade or not? Also, it looks like the bug only affects
standbys (or at least that's what the commit message seems to imply),
which makes it less of a data-loss hazard than it might've been.

regards, tom lane