Re: First draft of PG 19 release notes

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: First draft of PG 19 release notes
Date: 2026-06-16 23:41:23
Message-ID: ajHfI44jAAd0bah7@momjian.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 02:31:38PM +0530, Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 6:49 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> I have completed the first draft of the PG 19 release notes:
>
>         https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/release-19.html
>
>
> Thanks for working on this.
>
> I noticed the notes don't mention the pg_rewind improvement committed in
> 5173bfd0 ("pg_rewind: Skip copy of WAL segments generated before point of
> divergence") [0].
>
> [0] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/
> 181b4c6fa9c.b8b725681941212.7547232617810891479%40viggy28.dev

True. In reading the commit message, it seems like a minor improvement
that wasn't worth mentioning; it says:

This commit makes the way WAL segments are handled from the source
to the target server slightly smarter:
----------------

and

This change can make the rewind operation cheaper in some
configurations, especially for setups where some WAL retention
causes many segments to remain on the source server even after the
promotion of a standby used as source to rewind a previous primary.

It seemed like a nice improvement, but not something that would be
useful for the average user to know.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2026-06-16 23:47:35 Re: IGNORE/RESPECT NULLS can be specified for (prokind == 'f').
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2026-06-16 23:31:23 Re: 004_timeline_switch TAP test may fail