| From: | John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: First draft of PG 19 release notes |
| Date: | 2026-05-12 03:38:40 |
| Message-ID: | CANWCAZYo+tUkcGJ=rwSDu77pPR775s9VGvT38t1ZiDqG6aLszw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 9:35 AM Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 5:42 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 12:40:38PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> > > > Optionally use AVX2 CPU instructions for calculating page checksums (Matthew Sterrett, Andrew Kim) §
> > >
> > > > Optionally use ARM Crypto Extension to Compute CRC32C (John Naylor) §
> > >
> > > There's no option for these, the extensions are used where available.
> >
> > So, the "Optionally" indicates we use these instructions if the CPU
> > supports them. I assume we don't use them on all CPUs. Can you
> > suggest better wording?
> >
>
> I think the simplest change would be to replace "optionally" with
> "when available", although ISTR we use wording along the lines of "Add
> support for" or "is now supported" when runtime/compiler checks are
> involved.
That would be fine. The v17 and v18 release notes didn't have such
qualifying language, for things that are less common than the above
(SVE, AVX-512), but whatever.
--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2026-05-12 04:11:16 | Re: First draft of PG 19 release notes |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-05-12 03:30:53 | Re: Fix unsafe PlannedStmt access in pg_stat_statements |