From: | Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 18 GA press release draft |
Date: | 2025-09-10 06:58:14 |
Message-ID: | CAKZiRmzUU1j+NykJ40mD_L6u41PVgH7_7NUu-924z=nsZfe-UQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 5:14 AM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Attached is a draft of the PostgreSQL 18 GA press release. A few
> comments before the ask for reviewing:
>
Hi Jonathan,
> Finally, PostgreSQL 18 introduces support for [NUMA awareness](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/install-make.html#CONFIGURE-OPTION-WITH-LIBNUMA) that adds basic [NUMA observability](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/view-pg-shmem-allocations-numa.html) to PostgreSQL.
For some reason I find this sentence not accurate: NUMA awareness
somehow indicates that we get performance benefits out of this, but we
do not (yet*) - we simply provide some insight into NUMA memory
layout so far and link against libnuma. So maybe we should remove
"introduces support for [NUMA
awareness](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/install-make.html#CONFIGURE-OPTION-WITH-LIBNUMA)
that"
and just leave it as
"Finally, PostgreSQL 18 adds basic [NUMA observability]" ?
Rationale: for every other software that I saw NUMA awareness
reference was always linked to gaining performance , but just linking
against libnuma is not giving us this.
* = with on going work for 19 (future Tomas's we'll get there I hope)
-J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shubham Khanna | 2025-09-10 07:12:53 | Re: Add support for specifying tables in pg_createsubscriber. |
Previous Message | BharatDB | 2025-09-10 06:55:45 | Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree |