Draft release notes up for review

On 02/16/2014 03:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

Draft release notes for 9.3.3 are committed and can be read at
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/release-9-3-3.html
Any comments before I start transposing them into the back branches?

Major:

Do we have an explantion of what a multixact is, anywhere, so that we
can link it?

Minor:

ECPG or ecpg? Pick one or the other.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus wrote:

On 02/16/2014 03:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

Draft release notes for 9.3.3 are committed and can be read at
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/release-9-3-3.html
Any comments before I start transposing them into the back branches?

Major:

Do we have an explantion of what a multixact is, anywhere, so that we
can link it?

Is this enough?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/routine-vacuuming.html#VACUUM-FOR-MULTIXACT-WRAPAROUND

--
�lvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:

On 02/16/2014 03:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

Draft release notes for 9.3.3 are committed and can be read at
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/release-9-3-3.html
Any comments before I start transposing them into the back branches?

Major:

Do we have an explantion of what a multixact is, anywhere, so that we
can link it?

Fixed. I did a bit of wordsmithing on the text Alvaro pointed to, too.

Minor:

ECPG or ecpg? Pick one or the other.

AFAICS, "ecpg" is the vast majority case in the release notes, so
that's what I've used.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Any comments before I start transposing them into the back branches?

Sorry I'm late.

Shore up GRANT ... WITH ADMIN OPTION restrictions (Noah Misch)

I'm not familiar with the phrase "Shore up", I think it should use
more precise language: are the privilege checks getting more strict or
less strict?

----

Wow, there are quite a lot of items this time. Have you considered
grouping the items by their impact, for example security/data
corruption/crash/correctness/other? I think that would make it easier
for readers to find items they're interested in. Most changes seem
pretty straightforward to categorize; there are always outliers, but
even if a few items are miscategorized, that's an improvement over
what we have now. Of course someone has to be willing to do that work.

If this warrants more discussion, I can draft out a proposal in a new topic.

Regards,
Marti

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 08:29:38PM +0200, Marti Raudsepp wrote:

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Shore up GRANT ... WITH ADMIN OPTION restrictions (Noah Misch)

I'm not familiar with the phrase "Shore up", I think it should use
more precise language: are the privilege checks getting more strict or
less strict?

Here, "shore up" essentially means "fix." The checks are now stricter. I
will look for more-specific words next time, but I think the paragraph
following that headline illustrates that we fixed overly-permissive checks.

--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers