Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 06:31 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
I also notice that two performance features have disappeared from the
release notes. (Presumably they have been removed from source). Both of
them have changes that can be seen by users, so can't see why we would
want
Greg,
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
On Nov 30, 2007 4:49 AM, Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Simon Riggs wrote:
- Heap-Only Tuples (HOT) accelerate space reuse for UPDATEs
change to
Heap-Only Tuples (HOT) improve performance of frequent UPDATEs
I think we need to qualify this, or it could be quite misleading.
perhaps add that don't affect indexed columns or something like
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 09:49 +, Gregory Stark wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On 11/30/07, Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 06:31 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
I also notice that two performance features have disappeared from the
release notes. (Presumably they have been removed from source). Both of
them have changes that can be seen by users, so can't see why we would
want them removed.
Wow,
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Usama Dar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i agree that release notes should not be too long, but may be there should
be (if there isn't one already) something like a change log where people
can find out all the changes done from the previous release, if they are
intrested ?
The CVS history (either
Heikki,
This might be worth mentioning, since it can be quite a big difference
in the right circumstances, and it helps a bit with the scalability
problem of the recovery. Should mention that it only helps with
full_pages_writes=on. One more reason to not gamble with data integrity
;-).
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I disagree. For people who want a quick summary of the major user-facing
things changed we'll have multiple sources: (a) the announcement, (b) the
press features list, (c) the Feature-Version matrix. The Release notes
should have a *complete* list of
Few proposals
- Can we say smoothed rather than distributed checkpoints?
Smoothed checkpoints greatly reduce checkpoint I/O spikes
- Heap-Only Tuples (HOT) accelerate space reuse for UPDATEs
change to
Heap-Only Tuples (HOT) improve performance of frequent UPDATEs
I also notice that two
101 - 112 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
