2023-08-10 release announcement draft

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 13:15, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

Attached is the release announcement draft for the 2023-08-10 update
release, which also includes the release of PostgreSQL 16 Beta 3.

Thanks for drafting this.

* Fix a performance regression when running concurrent
[`COPY`](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-copy.html) statements on a
single table.

I think this is still outstanding. A bit of work has been done for the
int parsing regression but it seems there's still a performance
regression when running multiple COPYs on the same table, per [1]/messages/by-id/CAD21AoC0GvCEZbDreoAcj=i0LjNCQePQbh_cxCuBKezYgYwmTA@mail.gmail.com.

or an previous major version of PostgreSQL, you will need to use a strategy

"a previous".

David

[1]: /messages/by-id/CAD21AoC0GvCEZbDreoAcj=i0LjNCQePQbh_cxCuBKezYgYwmTA@mail.gmail.com

On 8/7/23 9:45 PM, David Rowley wrote:

* Fix a performance regression when running concurrent
[`COPY`](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-copy.html) statements on a
single table.

I think this is still outstanding. A bit of work has been done for the
int parsing regression but it seems there's still a performance
regression when running multiple COPYs on the same table, per [1].

Hm, the open item was closed[1]https://wiki.postgresql.org/index.php?title=PostgreSQL_16_Open_Items#resolved_before_16beta3 -- was that premature, or is this a new
issue (have not yet read the thread you referenced)?

or an previous major version of PostgreSQL, you will need to use a strategy

"a previous".

Thanks for the catch -- fixed locally.

Jonathan

[1]: https://wiki.postgresql.org/index.php?title=PostgreSQL_16_Open_Items#resolved_before_16beta3
https://wiki.postgresql.org/index.php?title=PostgreSQL_16_Open_Items#resolved_before_16beta3

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 13:49, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On 8/7/23 9:45 PM, David Rowley wrote:

* Fix a performance regression when running concurrent
[`COPY`](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-copy.html) statements on a
single table.

I think this is still outstanding. A bit of work has been done for the
int parsing regression but it seems there's still a performance
regression when running multiple COPYs on the same table, per [1].

Hm, the open item was closed[1] -- was that premature, or is this a new
issue (have not yet read the thread you referenced)?

I closed it thinking that enough had been done to resolve the
performance regression. In the linked thread, Sawadasan shows that
that's not the case. So, yes, premature. I've reverted the change to
the open items list now.

David

On 8/7/23 9:53 PM, David Rowley wrote:

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 13:49, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On 8/7/23 9:45 PM, David Rowley wrote:

* Fix a performance regression when running concurrent
[`COPY`](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-copy.html) statements on a
single table.

I think this is still outstanding. A bit of work has been done for the
int parsing regression but it seems there's still a performance
regression when running multiple COPYs on the same table, per [1].

Hm, the open item was closed[1] -- was that premature, or is this a new
issue (have not yet read the thread you referenced)?

I closed it thinking that enough had been done to resolve the
performance regression. In the linked thread, Sawadasan shows that
that's not the case. So, yes, premature. I've reverted the change to
the open items list now.

Got it. I reverted it as well from the release announcement. Reattaching
with the clean copy.

(Aside: I'm super excited for this PG16 improvement + fixed regression,
as lately I've had to do some bulk imports on a single table that could
really benefit from this :)

Jonathan

Op 8/8/23 om 03:15 schreef Jonathan S. Katz:

Please provide your feedback no later than August 10, 2023 0:00 AoE[1].

'You us' should be
'You use'
(2x)

Erik

On 8/8/23 1:30 AM, Erik Rijkers wrote:

Op 8/8/23 om 03:15 schreef Jonathan S. Katz:

Please provide your feedback no later than August 10, 2023 0:00 AoE[1].

'You us'  should be
'You use'
   (2x)

It should actually be just "Use" -- but I've fixed both instances. Thanks!

Jonathan

On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 9:15 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

Hi,

Attached is the release announcement draft for the 2023-08-10 update
release, which also includes the release of PostgreSQL 16 Beta 3.

Please provide your feedback no later than August 10, 2023 0:00 AoE[1].

Thanks,

Jonathan

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anywhere_on_Earth

"Users who have skipped one or more update releases may need to run
additional, post-update steps; "

The comma should be removed.

"please see the release notes for earlier versions for details."

Use of 'for' twice is grammatically incorrect; I am partial to "please
see the release notes from earlier versions for details." but could
also see "please see the release notes for earlier versions to get
details."

Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net

On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:03:44PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

Fixes in PostgreSQL 16 Beta 3
-----------------------------

The following includes fixes included in PostgreSQL 16 Beta 3:

With both "includes" and "included" there, this line reads awkwardly to me.
I'd just delete the line, since the heading has the same information.

On 8/9/23 1:04 AM, Noah Misch wrote:

On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:03:44PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

Fixes in PostgreSQL 16 Beta 3
-----------------------------

The following includes fixes included in PostgreSQL 16 Beta 3:

With both "includes" and "included" there, this line reads awkwardly to me.
I'd just delete the line, since the heading has the same information.

I took your suggestion. Thanks!

Jonathan

On 8/8/23 11:13 PM, Robert Treat wrote:

"Users who have skipped one or more update releases may need to run
additional, post-update steps; "

The comma should be removed.

"please see the release notes for earlier versions for details."

Use of 'for' twice is grammatically incorrect; I am partial to "please
see the release notes from earlier versions for details." but could
also see "please see the release notes for earlier versions to get
details."

Interestingly, I think this language has been unmodified for awhile.
Upon reading it, I agree, and took your suggestions.

Thanks,

Jonathan

Hi,

Sorry, join late after the release note is out.

* An out-of-memory error from JIT will now cause a PostgreSQL `FATAL`

error instead of a C++ exception.

I assume this statement is related to this fix[1]https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blame/accf4f84887eb8b53978a0dbf9cb5656e1779fcb/doc/src/sgml/release-15.sgml#L488-L509.
I think an OOM error from JIT causing a PostgreSQL `FATAL` error is the
actual behavior before the fix.
What the fix does is to bring exceptions back to the c++ world when OOM
happens outside of LLVM.

Thanks,
Donghang Lin

[1]: https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blame/accf4f84887eb8b53978a0dbf9cb5656e1779fcb/doc/src/sgml/release-15.sgml#L488-L509
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blame/accf4f84887eb8b53978a0dbf9cb5656e1779fcb/doc/src/sgml/release-15.sgml#L488-L509

On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 7:10 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
wrote: