First draft of Beta announcement

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
40 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

First draft of Beta announcement

Josh Berkus-6
Folks:

Read it here:

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD

Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
to the git repo if you have access.

--
Josh Berkus
Containers & Databases Oh My!


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Andres Freund
Hi,


On 2017-05-10 17:01:27 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks:
>
> Read it here:
>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>
> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
> to the git repo if you have access.

I'm biased, but imo we should also mention that analytics type queries
are significantly faster (5dfc198146b, 75ae538bc, 8ed3f11bb0,
b8d7f053c5c2).  See slide 13 (9.6 -> first three improvements) and slide
18 (first three -> last improvement).

- Andres


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Joshua Drake-2
On 05/10/2017 05:14 PM, Andres Freund wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> On 2017-05-10 17:01:27 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Folks:
>>
>> Read it here:
>>
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>>
>> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
>> to the git repo if you have access.
>
> I'm biased, but imo we should also mention that analytics type queries
> are significantly faster (5dfc198146b, 75ae538bc, 8ed3f11bb0,

Agreed. BI is and analytics is all the rage.

> b8d7f053c5c2).  See slide 13 (9.6 -> first three improvements) and slide
> 18 (first three -> last improvement).
>
> - Andres
>
>


--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Daniel Gustafsson
In reply to this post by Josh Berkus-6
> On 11 May 2017, at 02:01, Josh Berkus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Folks:
>
> Read it here:
>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>
> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
> to the git repo if you have access.

Pushed a fix to use https rather than http for postgresql.org links to avoid
redirects.

cheers ./daniel

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Petr Jelinek-4
In reply to this post by Josh Berkus-6
On 11/05/17 02:01, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks:
>
> Read it here:
>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>
> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
> to the git repo if you have access.

Hi,

> +  We have also made two improvements to PostgreSQL connections, which we are calling on driver authors to support, and users to test:

Says two, lists three.


--
  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Petr Jelinek-4
In reply to this post by Andres Freund
On 11/05/17 02:14, Andres Freund wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> On 2017-05-10 17:01:27 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Folks:
>>
>> Read it here:
>>
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>>
>> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
>> to the git repo if you have access.
>
> I'm biased, but imo we should also mention that analytics type queries
> are significantly faster (5dfc198146b, 75ae538bc, 8ed3f11bb0,
> b8d7f053c5c2).  See slide 13 (9.6 -> first three improvements) and slide
> 18 (first three -> last improvement).
>

What slide? Where?

I do agree that this deserves mention though.

--
  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Andres Freund
On 2017-05-11 14:07:35 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:

> On 11/05/17 02:14, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > On 2017-05-10 17:01:27 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> Folks:
> >>
> >> Read it here:
> >>
> >> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
> >>
> >> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
> >> to the git repo if you have access.
> >
> > I'm biased, but imo we should also mention that analytics type queries
> > are significantly faster (5dfc198146b, 75ae538bc, 8ed3f11bb0,
> > b8d7f053c5c2).  See slide 13 (9.6 -> first three improvements) and slide
> > 18 (first three -> last improvement).
> >
>
> What slide? Where?

Oops, wanted to reference this:
http://anarazel.de/talks/pgconf-us-2017-03-29/jit.pdf

- Andres


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Josh Berkus-6
All,

This has been updated with fixes per Andres, Debra, and Petr.

Please look and suggest any additional improvements.

--
Josh Berkus
Containers & Databases Oh My!


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Andres Freund
On 2017-05-11 12:08:04 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> This has been updated with fixes per Andres, Debra, and Petr.
>
> Please look and suggest any additional improvements.

There's not JIT compilation in v10 - I wish ;).  I tried to point in the
right direction with the list of commits, and the relevant slide
numbers...

- Andres


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Gunnar "Nick" Bluth
In reply to this post by Josh Berkus-6
Am 11.05.2017 um 02:01 schrieb Josh Berkus:
> Folks:
>
> Read it here:
>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>
> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
> to the git repo if you have access.


 65 * [What's New in
9.6](https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/New_in_postgres_10)
  66 * [9.5 Open
Items](https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_10_Open_Items)

Those should probably read "10.0" or "10", not "9.6" and "9.5" resp.

Best regards,
--
Gunnar "Nick" Bluth
DBA ELSTER
Extern im Auftrag der Hays AG

Tel:   +49 911/991-4665
Mobil: +49 172/8853339


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Peter Eisentraut-6
In reply to this post by Josh Berkus-6
On 5/10/17 20:01, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Read it here:
>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>
> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
> to the git repo if you have access.

The capitalization in this text is really weird.  Most capitalized words
should not be.

--
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Joshua Drake-2
On 05/12/2017 07:01 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> On 5/10/17 20:01, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Read it here:
>>
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>>
>> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
>> to the git repo if you have access.
>
> The capitalization in this text is really weird.  Most capitalized words
> should not be.

As this is a Beta announcement, the capitalization makes sense as a
whole. I am not sure it would make sense as much in the release notes.
There are a couple of things:

* target_session_attrs parameter, so a client can request a read/write host

Most people won't know what that means. I can conclude that it means
that we can now connect to PostgreSQL and say, "please give me a read
only or a read/write host" but I am sure I am not 100% correct. I know
more about PostgreSQL than most who will care about this announcement.

* WAL support for Hash Indexes

Crash safe Hash Indexes or ACID compliant Hash Indexes.

WAL is irrelevant in terms of the announcement.

New "monitoring" roles for permission grants

Is roles supposed to be plural?

Full Text Search support for JSON and JSONB
XMLTABLE query expression
Push Down Aggregates to Foreign Servers
WAL support for Hash Indexes

The order above is going to likely be of more interest to our readers. I
am not suggesting we remove the other items in the list but give
precedence to those that most people will get the most bang for the buck
out of.

Push Down Aggregates to Foreign Servers

What does this mean? (I know what it means), the majority of our readers
will not.

Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible
changes. It is critical that all users test it against their
applications and platforms as soon as possible.

I don't think we need to say anything more than:

Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a
list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release notes).


Thanks,

JD





--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Justin Clift-2
On 12 May 2017, at 15:58, Joshua D. Drake <[hidden email]> wrote:
<snip>
> Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible changes. It is critical that all users test it against their applications and platforms as soon as possible.
>
> I don't think we need to say anything more than:
>
> Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release notes).

Calling it out specifically kind of makes sense though, just for the
extra mental prompting that people might otherwise overlook.

Would this do that, without making it sound quite as offputting?

  Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible
  changes. It is critical that all users test it against their applications
  before upgrading.

+ Justin

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi



--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Joshua Drake-2
On 05/12/2017 08:04 AM, Justin Clift wrote:

> On 12 May 2017, at 15:58, Joshua D. Drake <[hidden email]> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible changes. It is critical that all users test it against their applications and platforms as soon as possible.
>>
>> I don't think we need to say anything more than:
>>
>> Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release notes).
>
> Calling it out specifically kind of makes sense though, just for the
> extra mental prompting that people might otherwise overlook.
>
> Would this do that, without making it sound quite as offputting?
>
>   Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible
>   changes. It is critical that all users test it against their applications
>   before upgrading.

Yeah I am cool with that as long as we include the link to the release
notes.

JD


--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Josh Berkus-6
In reply to this post by Andres Freund
Josh, Justin, Andres, Gunnar, Peter:

Replying in one long-ass email:

On 05/11/2017 12:11 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-05-11 12:08:04 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> This has been updated with fixes per Andres, Debra, and Petr.
>>
>> Please look and suggest any additional improvements.
>
> There's not JIT compilation in v10 - I wish ;).  I tried to point in the
> right direction with the list of commits, and the relevant slide
> numbers...

Can you suggest a different 1-line description?  Because that's what I
got from your slides.  What are we actually doing differently?

On 05/12/2017 12:46 AM, Gunnar "Nick" Bluth wrote:
>  65 * [What's New in
> 9.6](https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/New_in_postgres_10)
>   66 * [9.5 Open
> Items](https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_10_Open_Items)
>
> Those should probably read "10.0" or "10", not "9.6" and "9.5" resp.
>
> Best regards,
>

Ooops, that was a commit-specific link.  Those are already fixed in
current.  Try this  link:

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob_plain;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;hb=HEAD

On 05/12/2017 07:01 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 5/10/17 20:01, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> > Read it here:
>> >
>> >
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>> >
>> > Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit
them
>> > to the git repo if you have access.
> The capitalization in this text is really weird.  Most capitalized words
> should not be.

I was capitalizing the names of new features to call them out.  Too
confusing?

On 05/12/2017 07:58 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 05/12/2017 07:01 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 5/10/17 20:01, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> Read it here:

> There are a couple of things:
>
> * target_session_attrs parameter, so a client can request a read/write
host
>
> Most people won't know what that means. I can conclude that it means
> that we can now connect to PostgreSQL and say, "please give me a read
> only or a read/write host" but I am sure I am not 100% correct. I know
> more about PostgreSQL than most who will care about this announcement.

The idea is more to get people -- specifically driver and ORM authors --
interested enough to bother looking up the feature.  Not to describe it
in full, which would take a paragraph.

> * WAL support for Hash Indexes
>
> Crash safe Hash Indexes or ACID compliant Hash Indexes.

Crash safe is good.

>
> WAL is irrelevant in terms of the announcement.
>
> New "monitoring" roles for permission grants
>
> Is roles supposed to be plural?

Yes.

>
> Full Text Search support for JSON and JSONB
> XMLTABLE query expression
> Push Down Aggregates to Foreign Servers
> WAL support for Hash Indexes
>
> The order above is going to likely be of more interest to our readers. I
> am not suggesting we remove the other items in the list but give
> precedence to those that most people will get the most bang for the buck
> out of.

OK.

>
> Push Down Aggregates to Foreign Servers
>
> What does this mean? (I know what it means), the majority of our readers
> will not.

If you can come up with a wording here which is clearer but takes one
line, be my guest.  I was unable to.

> Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible
> changes. It is critical that all users test it against their
> applications and platforms as soon as possible.
>
> I don't think we need to say anything more than:
>
> Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a
> list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release
> notes).

I disagree. As a rule, we don't break backwards compatibility so pg 10
is going to be a shock to a lot of people.  We really haven't seen this
quantity of breakage since 8.3, which was released nine years ago, long
before the majority of our current users were using Postgres.  Given
that -- because of partiitoning and logical replication -- many users
will want to upgrade to 10 the month it comes out, I think we need to
point out *in detail* why they will want to do extra testing.  At a
minimum, this includes the change in version numbering, the renaming of
xlog to wal, and dropping support for FEBE 1.0.

I'm personally planning to also write a blog post called "break all the
things" with even more detail (I was going to contribute this to the
main docs, but nobody on -hackers can decide where it should go).


--
Josh Berkus
Containers & Databases Oh My!


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Joshua Drake-2
On 05/12/2017 09:40 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh, Justin, Andres, Gunnar, Peter:
>

>> Most people won't know what that means. I can conclude that it means
>> that we can now connect to PostgreSQL and say, "please give me a read
>> only or a read/write host" but I am sure I am not 100% correct. I know
>> more about PostgreSQL than most who will care about this announcement.
>
> The idea is more to get people -- specifically driver and ORM authors --
> interested enough to bother looking up the feature.  Not to describe it
> in full, which would take a paragraph.

Sure but still, the line doesn't really mean anything. Perhaps:

* Driver API for read only or read/write database routing? (I know
that's wrong but I think you know what I am getting at.

>> * WAL support for Hash Indexes
>>
>> Crash safe Hash Indexes or ACID compliant Hash Indexes.
>
> Crash safe is good.
>
>>
>> WAL is irrelevant in terms of the announcement.
>>
>> New "monitoring" roles for permission grants
>>
>> Is roles supposed to be plural?
>
> Yes.

Then let's list them with context. Something like:

New roles, x,y and z for monitoring purposes

>>
>> Push Down Aggregates to Foreign Servers
>>
>> What does this mean? (I know what it means), the majority of our readers
>> will not.
>
> If you can come up with a wording here which is clearer but takes one
> line, be my guest.  I was unable to.

Planner support for aggregates on foreign (linked) tables

I added linked because it is a term that Oracle and MSSQL DBAs will get.

>> I don't think we need to say anything more than:
>>
>> Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a
>> list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release
>> notes).
>
> I disagree. As a rule, we don't break backwards compatibility so pg 10
> is going to be a shock to a lot of people.  We really haven't seen this
> quantity of breakage since 8.3, which was released nine years ago, long
> before the majority of our current users were using Postgres.  Given
> that -- because of partiitoning and logical replication -- many users
> will want to upgrade to 10 the month it comes out, I think we need to
> point out *in detail* why they will want to do extra testing.  At a
> minimum, this includes the change in version numbering, the renaming of
> xlog to wal, and dropping support for FEBE 1.0.

We should point out IN EXCRUCIATING DETAIL, in the release notes.

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Joshua Drake-2
In reply to this post by Josh Berkus-6
On 05/12/2017 09:40 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh, Justin, Andres, Gunnar, Peter:

> I disagree. As a rule, we don't break backwards compatibility so pg 10
> is going to be a shock to a lot of people.  We really haven't seen this
> quantity of breakage since 8.3, which was released nine years ago, long
> before the majority of our current users were using Postgres.  Given
> that -- because of partiitoning and logical replication -- many users
> will want to upgrade to 10 the month it comes out, I think we need to
> point out *in detail* why they will want to do extra testing.  At a
> minimum, this includes the change in version numbering, the renaming of
> xlog to wal, and dropping support for FEBE 1.0.

In thinking about this, succinct may be much better:

Version 10 *breaks compatibility* with previous versions. See the full
details in the release notes at:

Or

V10 Breaks all the things. See the full details...

I know the latter is out of our norm but everybody knows the break all
the things meme (especially people that would be willing to beta test).
Let's have "a little" fun but make it very clear.

(I would not recommend that wording for final release)

JD


--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MASSMAIL]Re: [pgsql-advocacy] First draft of Beta announcement

gilberto.castillo

> On 05/12/2017 09:40 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Josh, Justin, Andres, Gunnar, Peter:
>
>> I disagree. As a rule, we don't break backwards compatibility so pg 10
>> is going to be a shock to a lot of people.  We really haven't seen this
>> quantity of breakage since 8.3, which was released nine years ago, long
>> before the majority of our current users were using Postgres.  Given
>> that -- because of partiitoning and logical replication -- many users
>> will want to upgrade to 10 the month it comes out, I think we need to
>> point out *in detail* why they will want to do extra testing.  At a
>> minimum, this includes the change in version numbering, the renaming of
>> xlog to wal, and dropping support for FEBE 1.0.
>
> In thinking about this, succinct may be much better:
>
> Version 10 *breaks compatibility* with previous versions. See the full
> details in the release notes at:
>
> Or
>
> V10 Breaks all the things. See the full details...
>
> I know the latter is out of our norm but everybody knows the break all
> the things meme (especially people that would be willing to beta test).
> Let's have "a little" fun but make it very clear.
>
> (I would not recommend that wording for final release)
>

+++1



--
Saludos,
Gilberto Castillo
ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba



--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Magnus Hagander-2
In reply to this post by Josh Berkus-6
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Josh Berkus <[hidden email]> wrote:


> * WAL support for Hash Indexes
>
> Crash safe Hash Indexes or ACID compliant Hash Indexes.

Crash safe is good.


Also worth having something there about them now being replication safe? "Crash and replication safe" sounds a bit weird though, but something along that line?

 
> Version 10 will have an unusually high number of backwards-incompatible
> changes. It is critical that all users test it against their
> applications and platforms as soon as possible.
>
> I don't think we need to say anything more than:
>
> Version 10 has a high number of backwards-incompatible changes. For a
> list of these changes please see the [Release Notes](link to release
> notes).

I disagree. As a rule, we don't break backwards compatibility so pg 10
is going to be a shock to a lot of people.  We really haven't seen this
quantity of breakage since 8.3, which was released nine years ago, long
before the majority of our current users were using Postgres.  Given
that -- because of partiitoning and logical replication -- many users
will want to upgrade to 10 the month it comes out, I think we need to
point out *in detail* why they will want to do extra testing.  At a
minimum, this includes the change in version numbering, the renaming of
xlog to wal, and dropping support for FEBE 1.0.

None of those are very likely to break *applications*.

Most applications don't talk to the xlog/wal functions. DBA tools and scripts and whatnot *do*, but it is probably worth distinguishing that from applications, because they're also usually different ownership within organisations. It is likely to break more or less all of those though.

And I really doubt protocol v1.0 dropping is going to hit a lot of people.

--
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: First draft of Beta announcement

Peter Eisentraut-6
In reply to this post by Joshua Drake-2
On 5/12/17 10:58, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> On 05/12/2017 07:01 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 5/10/17 20:01, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> Read it here:
>>>
>>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=releases/10/beta/10beta1.md;h=f0d2e6ad2637281194ce212f9b7553eff1301c58;hb=HEAD
>>>
>>> Please comment with improvements/suggestions/corrections, or submit them
>>> to the git repo if you have access.
>>
>> The capitalization in this text is really weird.  Most capitalized words
>> should not be.
>
> As this is a Beta announcement, the capitalization makes sense as a
> whole.

What is the theory behind the capitalization in any of these phrases:

* WAL support for Hash Indexes
* Multi-column Correlation Statistics
* New "monitoring" roles for permission grants
* Latch Wait times in pg_stat_activity
* XMLTABLE query expression
* Restrictive Policies for Row Level Security
* Full Text Search support for JSON and JSONB
* Compression support for pg_receivewal
* ICU collation support
* Push Down Aggregates to foreign servers
* Transition Tables in trigger execution
* JIT Query Compilation

This is neither a situation where title case is appropriate (nor would
it be a correct application thereof), nor are most of these proper nouns.

--
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
12