From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Release Note Changes |
Date: | 2007-11-30 14:38:47 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150711300638n7cf287d1m695956b71e9c0b1f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Nov 30, 2007 4:49 AM, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > If people understand there aren't 13 performance improvements there are
> > at *least* 19+ that is a positive message to help people decide to
> > upgrade.
>
> Frankly I think the release notes are already too long. People who judge a
> release by counting the number of items in the release notes are not worth
> appeasing. Including every individual lock removed or code path optimized will
> only obscure the important points on which people should be judging the
> relevance of the release to them. Things like smoothing checkpoint i/o which
> could be removing a show-stopper problem for them.
IMO, it's probably good to include things that materially affect how
people operate the databse. An example is improvements to statistics
gathering because it eliminates a historical trade-off in configuring
the server. I agree with you regarding basic operations though.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2007-11-30 15:09:54 | Re: .NET or Mono functions in PG |
Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2007-11-30 14:20:32 | Re: .NET or Mono functions in PG |