On 2017-04-24 23:37:42 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 08:36:00PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2017-04-24 21:31:44 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > I have committed the first draft of the Postgres 10 release notes. They
> > > are current as of two days ago, and I will keep them current. Please
> > > give me any feedback you have.
> > >
> > > The only unusual thing is that this release has ~180 items while most
> > > recent release have had ~220. The pattern I see that there are more
> > > large features in this release than previous ones.
> >
> > I think that might also be because you skipped a few things that should
> > get their own entries. I've not yet made a pass through your draft (and
> > won't for some days), but a quick search shows the draft to e.g miss:
> > b30d3ea824c5ccba43d3e942704f20686e7dbab8 - Add a macro templatized hashtable.
> > 75ae538bc3168bf44475240d4e0487ee2f3bb376 - Use more efficient hashtable for tidbitmap.c to speed up bitmap scans.
> > 5dfc198146b49ce7ecc8a1fc9d5e171fb75f6ba5 - Use more efficient hashtable for execGrouping.c to speed up hash
aggregation.
> > fc4b3dea2950e4f6081f1ed2380f82c9efd672e0 - User narrower representative tuples in the hash-agg hashtable.
> > 8ed3f11bb045ad7a3607690be668dbd5b3cc31d7 - Perform one only projection to compute agg arguments.
> > (not that this needs to five entries)
>
> I remember seeing those and those are normally details I do not put in
> the release notes as there isn't a clear user experience change except
> "Postgres is faster". Yeah, a bummer, and I can change my filter, but
> it would require discussion.
I think "postgres is faster" is one of the bigger user demands, so I
don't think that policy makes much sense. A large number of the changes
over the next few releases will focus solely on that. Nor do I think
past release notes particularly filtered such changes out.
- Andres