Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed

From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed
Date: 2025-06-11 18:45:58
Message-ID: CAAKRu_ZKzKNrUiuhBRHwSDD64FQsWDzCGDUw+cNfN+RQtqL2tA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 12:41 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 09:42:30AM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > > "Add an asynchronous I/O subsystem"
> > I noticed in the PG 17 release notes [1] we did include the shas of
> > each of the commits for the read stream users. Should we do that here
> > as well? Those are what enable those operations to use AIO.
>
> So, I added the read stream item to PG 17 since that was a new
> infrastructure feature, but for PG 18, we are just improving that
> internal infrastructure, so didn't mention it. If you think we should
> add those commits, I can do it.

I wouldn't consider it as improving internal infrastructure exactly.
My understanding is that usually when we add new features, even if
they use an existing API, we still include them, as relevant, in the
release notes. For example, next release we hope to have index
prefetching -- but it may be implemented using the read stream API.
Does that mean we wouldn't mention it in the release notes?

- Melanie

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2025-06-11 18:47:01 Re: Improve tab completion for COPY
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2025-06-11 18:16:15 Re: Batch TIDs lookup in ambulkdelete