OK, I will work it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 23:22 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Usually the major items just jump out of the release list. In this > > case, nothing really jumped out, and I felt if I listed sereral, it was > > going to look weak because they were not big things, so I figured I > > would just go with the "broad" list. > > Look back at the 7.4 release notes as a comparison. I think 8.0 was such > a milestone release we tend to judge ourselves by that and maybe feel > like the pace has slackened. IMHO, it has accelerated. We hit the lower > hanging fruit first, so early features were major items; later items > seem smaller and less important by comparison, especially when completed > by a team rather than a few individuals. > > I don't think it matters whether the new features originated as a single > patch or as a stream of smaller patches. The end result is a major > improvement in a specific area. Picking one area I'm more familiar with, > sort performance was increased over many patches by many people, but the > original objective of making a step-change in that area *has* been > achieved (even if there are some additional gains still to be had for > certain narrower use-cases). > > The role of the "Major changes" section is to provide a summary for > administrators who need to understand what a new release will give them > and make a cost/benefit judgement. We want people to understand the good > work that has been done and that does involve some filtering and > summarization, and its possibly true that it is harder in this release > than others. > > We need a Major changes section: People don't read the detail: sysadmins > are too busy these days. If there are no major features listed, people > will assume there are none and say "oh its just a bug fix release". If > we aren't encouraging people to upgrade, why release at all? Maybe > people only upgrade every other release - if so, we'll get all of the > 8.0 upgraders. > > Improving scalability in 8.1 was great. Improving it again in 8.2 is > amazing and we should tell people, even if it sounds somewhat boring > because we did it last time as well. I think: again, wow, this software > is going places. Personally, I'll be ecstatic if we can do that again > for 8.3... > > > Or perhaps we can do more broad-stroke list items, like monitoring or > > performance, as listed below. > > Whether we like my list or not, I think such a grouped list should > exist. I'm mainly seeking to persuade you on that point and would be > comfortable even if you came up with a different grouped list. > > Seeing a list of names after a topic emphasises the community > development process. In some cases, there was a stated objective and > that has been achieved. In other cases there was a community-driven move > in directions maybe we didn't predict. In the latter case, surely it is > the strength of open source that evolution works so well and really does > produce noticeably major changes. The changes in monitoring and tuning > tools is an excellent example: many smaller changes making a significant > improvement. > > Please vote in favour of a Major Changes section. > > -- > Simon Riggs > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
