On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 03:05:52PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> Many thanks to Nathan for pulling this together. Please see v3. Feedback
> welcome.
I'm hoping to commit this around 20:00 UTC today, and I will be happy to
address any feedback that folks have in the meantime.
--
nathan
On 9/19/25 12:50 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 09:25:52AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
I'm hoping to commit this around 20:00 UTC today, and I will be happy to
address any feedback that folks have in the meantime.
Here's a v4. The content is the same except for a typo fix,
Committed.
--
nathan
On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 01:04:26PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 9/19/25 12:50 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> + An asynchronous I/O subsystem (AIO) that can improve performance of
>> + sequential scans, bitmap heap scans, vacuums, and other operations.
>>
>> I wondered whether we sho
On 9/19/25 4:09 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
Committed.
Thanks!
Jonathan
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 09:25:52AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I'm hoping to commit this around 20:00 UTC today, and I will be happy to
> address any feedback that folks have in the meantime.
Here's a v4. The content is the same except for a typo fix, some
formatting adjustments that don't cha
On 9/18/25 3:32 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 03:25:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
As I see it, while our feature freeze isn't perfect -- mostly because
too many things get slipped in at the last minute that aren't really
in great shape -- it's a lot better than the old proce
On 9/18/25 3:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 2:19 PM Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
Glad to hear I've been doing my job backwards for years ;) That said, I
am always willing to learn how to improve the process.
I don't really care for the flip tone here.
I didn't really care for
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 3:32 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I think we ought to set a deadline of, say, beta2 or beta3 and have the RMT
> responsible for making sure it happens. Either of those releases would
> still give us at least a month or so to address feedback before GA, but
> they aren't so e
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 03:25:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> As I see it, while our feature freeze isn't perfect -- mostly because
> too many things get slipped in at the last minute that aren't really
> in great shape -- it's a lot better than the old process where nobody
> really knew what the
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 2:19 PM Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> Glad to hear I've been doing my job backwards for years ;) That said, I
> am always willing to learn how to improve the process.
I don't really care for the flip tone here. I do think there's a
problem here, and I do think it's longstandin
On 9/18/25 2:33 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
On 9/18/25 2:19 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
Quick analysis of the differences:
Common:
* AIO
* skip scan
* pg_upgrade
* UUIDv7
* virtual generated columns
* OAuth
Only v1 (my patch):
* OLD/NEW for RETURNIN
On 9/18/25 2:19 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 01:38:44PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
That seems completely backwards to me. We should go with the version
that was submitted weeks ago and upon which people have had the
opportunity to comment unless you can justify each change th
On 9/18/25 1:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 12:59 PM Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
I like Nathan's version better. I suggest we go with that one.
Why? This seems arbitrary without more details.
I’ve spent the past several weeks staring at the release notes, talking to
users, an
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 01:38:44PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> That seems completely backwards to me. We should go with the version
> that was submitted weeks ago and upon which people have had the
> opportunity to comment unless you can justify each change that you now
> want to make at the last m
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 12:59 PM Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> > I like Nathan's version better. I suggest we go with that one.
>
> Why? This seems arbitrary without more details.
>
> I’ve spent the past several weeks staring at the release notes, talking to
> users, and putting together a presentati
> On Sep 18, 2025, at 12:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 12:09 PM Jonathan S. Katz
> wrote:
>> Please see attached draft for the major features of PostgreSQL 18.
>
> I like Nathan's version better. I suggest we go with that one.
Why? This seems arbitrary without mor
Op 9/18/25 om 18:08 schreef Jonathan S. Katz:
Please see attached draft for the major features of PostgreSQL 18.
[...]
> [v2-0001-add-major-features-to-v18-release-notes.patch]
One typo:
that can improves throughput should be
that can improve throughput
Erik
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 12:09 PM Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> Please see attached draft for the major features of PostgreSQL 18.
I like Nathan's version better. I suggest we go with that one.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On 9/17/25 2:51 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
On Sep 17, 2025, at 2:47 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 31.08.25 05:02, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 05:56:12PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
The 18beta1 announcement
> On Sep 17, 2025, at 2:47 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> On 31.08.25 05:02, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 05:56:12PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
The 18beta1 announcement [0] has a good list, too. *f
On 31.08.25 05:02, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 05:56:12PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
The 18beta1 announcement [0] has a good list, too. *facepalm* That one
seems to match mine pretty closely.
Yes, the list us
On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 08:51:40PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 31.08.25 16:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I think our past practice has been to list any one item either in
> > Migration or the following sections, not in both places. This item
> > seems to adhere to that too: I don't see that comm
On 31.08.25 16:34, Tom Lane wrote:
I think our past practice has been to list any one item either in
Migration or the following sections, not in both places. This item
seems to adhere to that too: I don't see that commit hash anywhere
else. So I'm not clear why you're finding this duplicative?
On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 10:34:43AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > On 30.08.25 18:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I suppose that the expectation is that every release note item
> >> will be credited to someone. Why does this item lack a credit?
>
> > Maybe I'm understanding this d
On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 01:34:26PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 30.08.25 18:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > Second, the release note item added by this commit:
> > > commit d1073c3b4cc
> > > Author: Peter Eisentraut
> > > Date: Fri Aug 29 10:18:10 2025 +0200
> >
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 30.08.25 18:52, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I suppose that the expectation is that every release note item
>> will be credited to someone. Why does this item lack a credit?
> Maybe I'm understanding this differently, but the "Migration" section
> ought to be advice about th
On 30.08.25 18:52, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
Second, the release note item added by this commit:
commit d1073c3b4cc
Author: Peter Eisentraut
Date: Fri Aug 29 10:18:10 2025 +0200
Unfortunately src/tools/add_commit_links.pl can't process the
and throws a
> On Aug 30, 2025, at 5:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 02:42:47PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 01:51:23PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
AFAIK nobody has started on the "
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 05:56:12PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> The 18beta1 announcement [0] has a good list, too. *facepalm* That one
>> seems to match mine pretty closely.
>
> Yes, the list usually comes from the press release
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 06:04:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Actually, in this case, it caught an obvious missing attribution, so it
> > actually helped, so let's not change it.
>
> Fair enough. I'd still like to put in the bit about
>
> my $major_version = $1;
>
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Actually, in this case, it caught an obvious missing attribution, so it
> actually helped, so let's not change it.
Fair enough. I'd still like to put in the bit about
my $major_version = $1;
+ die "file name $file is not in the expected format\n"
+
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 02:42:47PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 01:51:23PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> >> AFAIK nobody has started on the "new features and enhancements" section.
> >
> > Quick first at
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 02:17:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > If we're okay with items not having credits, then
> > add_commit_links.pl's logic for where to put the s needs
> > improvement. I don't really understand why it's looking for
> > parens in the first place -- why isn't the rul
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 12:52:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Second, the release note item added by this commit:
> > commit d1073c3b4cc
> > Author: Peter Eisentraut
> > Date: Fri Aug 29 10:18:10 2025 +0200
>
> > Unfortunately src/tools/add_commit_links.pl c
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 02:42:47PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 01:51:23PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> AFAIK nobody has started on the "new features and enhancements" section.
>
> Quick first attempt:
>
> * btree skip scan
> * async i/o
> * oauth
> * virtual generate
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 01:51:23PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> AFAIK nobody has started on the "new features and enhancements" section.
Quick first attempt:
* btree skip scan
* async i/o
* oauth
* virtual generated columns
* OLD/NEW support in RETURNING
* pg_upgrade improvements (stats, --jobs
> On 30 Aug 2025, at 20:51, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 12:38:06PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> First, the release notes are incomplete because the "new features and
>> enhancements" and "Acknowledgments" sections are empty.
>
> Corey Huinker claims to be working on the lis
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 12:38:06PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> First, the release notes are incomplete because the "new features and
> enhancements" and "Acknowledgments" sections are empty.
Corey Huinker claims to be working on the list of acknowledgments [0], but
I don't see any patches propos
I wrote:
> If we're okay with items not having credits, then
> add_commit_links.pl's logic for where to put the s needs
> improvement. I don't really understand why it's looking for
> parens in the first place -- why isn't the rule simply "put them
> before the first in the item"?
I revised the
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Second, the release note item added by this commit:
> commit d1073c3b4cc
> Author: Peter Eisentraut
> Date: Fri Aug 29 10:18:10 2025 +0200
> Unfortunately src/tools/add_commit_links.pl can't process the
> and throws an error because the previous line
If RC1 is supposed to actually match a release candidate, we have two
problems with its release notes.
First, the release notes are incomplete because the "new features and
enhancements" and "Acknowledgments" sections are empty.
Second, the release note item added by this commit:
commi
42 matches
Mail list logo
