From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Massa, Harald Armin" <chef(at)ghum(dot)de> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Alpha 1 release notes |
Date: | 2009-08-13 14:33:37 |
Message-ID: | 6881.1250174017@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Massa, Harald Armin" <chef(at)ghum(dot)de> writes:
> within source code, build options there is:
> - Reserve the shared memory region during backend startup on Windows,
> so that memory allocated by starting third party DLLs doesn't end up
> conflicting with it. Hopefully this solves the long-time issue with
> "could not reattach to shared memory" errors on Win32.
> I suggest that it should also be pointed out that this fix will be
> backported to 8.3 and 8.4 (as much as I followed the ML);
Normally, bug fixes that have been back-patched wouldn't be mentioned at
all in a new major release's release notes. The implied base that we
are comparing to in major-release notes is the end of the prior branch's
updates. I'm not sure if this case should be an exception, or if we
should have a different general rule for alpha releases. We'd like to
get more testing on that fix, so I think it is reasonable to mention it
for alpha1 --- but is that an exception specific to this bug fix, or
does it indicate we want to handle bug fixes differently in general
within alpha release notes?
In any case, it is not the function of the alpha release notes to
discuss changes in earlier release branches. The reason the commit
log points out the back-patch is to make it easier to extract the
information when we prepare release notes for the back-branch updates.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-13 14:36:57 | Re: trigger functions can only be called as triggers |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-08-13 14:32:40 | Re: Why is vacuum_freeze_min_age 100m? |