2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

Started by Jonathan S. Katzalmost 7 years ago8 messages
#1Jonathan S. Katz
jkatz@postgresql.org
1 attachment(s)

Hi,

Attached is a draft of the press release for the upcoming 2019-02-14
release. Feedback & suggestions are welcome.

Thanks!

Jonathan

Attachments:

20190214updaterelease.mdtext/markdown; name=20190214updaterelease.md; x-mac-creator=0; x-mac-type=0Download
#2Chapman Flack
chap@anastigmatix.net
In reply to: Jonathan S. Katz (#1)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

On 02/12/19 22:00, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

Attached is a draft of the press release for the upcoming 2019-02-14
release. Feedback & suggestions are welcome.

----
Users on PostgreSQL 9.4 should plan to upgrade to a supported version of
PostgreSQL as the community will stop releasing fixes for it on February 12,
2019. Please see our [versioning
policy](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/)
----

Should that be February 13, 2020? That's what the linked page says for 9.4.

February 12, 2019 would be (a) today, and (b) in the past for this press
release.

Cheers,
-Chap

#3Jonathan S. Katz
jkatz@postgresql.org
In reply to: Chapman Flack (#2)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

On 2/13/19 4:13 AM, Chapman Flack wrote:

On 02/12/19 22:00, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

Attached is a draft of the press release for the upcoming 2019-02-14
release. Feedback & suggestions are welcome.

----
Users on PostgreSQL 9.4 should plan to upgrade to a supported version of
PostgreSQL as the community will stop releasing fixes for it on February 12,
2019. Please see our [versioning
policy](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/)
----

Should that be February 13, 2020? That's what the linked page says for 9.4.

February 12, 2019 would be (a) today, and (b) in the past for this press
release.

Yes, good catch. Fixed.

Thanks,

Jonathan

#4Daniel Gustafsson
daniel@yesql.se
In reply to: Jonathan S. Katz (#1)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

On 13 Feb 2019, at 04:00, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

Attached is a draft of the press release for the upcoming 2019-02-14
release. Feedback & suggestions are welcome.

I think it should be “versions” in the below sentence?

"all currently supported version of PostgreSQL will only contain"

cheers ./daniel

#5Tatsuo Ishii
ishii@sraoss.co.jp
In reply to: Jonathan S. Katz (#1)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft,2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

2019-02-14 Cumulative Update Release
====================================

The PostgreSQL Global Development Group has released an update to all supported versions of our database system, including 11.2, 10.7, 9.6.12, 9.5.16, and 9.4.21. This release changes the behavior in how PostgreSQL interfaces with `fsync()` and includes fixes for partitioning and over 70 other bugs that were reported over the past three months.

Users should plan to apply this update at the next scheduled downtime.

Highlight: Change in behavior with `fsync()`
------------------------------------------

When available in an operating system and enabled in the configuration file (which it is by default), PostgreSQL uses the kernel function `fsync()` to help ensure that data is written to a disk. In some operating systems that provide `fsync()`, when the kernel is unable to write out the data, it returns a failure and flushes the data that was supposed to be written from its data buffers.

This flushing operation has an unfortunate side-effect for PostgreSQL: if PostgreSQL tries again to write the data to disk by again calling `fsync()`, `fsync()` will report back that it succeeded, but the data that PostgreSQL believed to be saved to the disk would not actually be written. This presents a possible data corruption scenario.

This update modifies how PostgreSQL handles a `fsync()` failure: PostgreSQL will no longer retry calling `fsync()` but instead will panic. In this case, PostgreSQL can then replay the data from the write-ahead log (WAL) to help ensure the data is written. While this may appear to be a suboptimal solution, there are presently few alternatives and, based on reports, the problem case occurs extremely rarely.

Shouldn't we mention that previous behavior (retrying fsync) can be
chosen by a new GUC parameter?

Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp

#6Jonathan S. Katz
jkatz@postgresql.org
In reply to: Tatsuo Ishii (#5)
1 attachment(s)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

On 2/13/19 1:35 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:

2019-02-14 Cumulative Update Release
====================================

The PostgreSQL Global Development Group has released an update to all supported versions of our database system, including 11.2, 10.7, 9.6.12, 9.5.16, and 9.4.21. This release changes the behavior in how PostgreSQL interfaces with `fsync()` and includes fixes for partitioning and over 70 other bugs that were reported over the past three months.

Users should plan to apply this update at the next scheduled downtime.

Highlight: Change in behavior with `fsync()`
------------------------------------------

When available in an operating system and enabled in the configuration file (which it is by default), PostgreSQL uses the kernel function `fsync()` to help ensure that data is written to a disk. In some operating systems that provide `fsync()`, when the kernel is unable to write out the data, it returns a failure and flushes the data that was supposed to be written from its data buffers.

This flushing operation has an unfortunate side-effect for PostgreSQL: if PostgreSQL tries again to write the data to disk by again calling `fsync()`, `fsync()` will report back that it succeeded, but the data that PostgreSQL believed to be saved to the disk would not actually be written. This presents a possible data corruption scenario.

This update modifies how PostgreSQL handles a `fsync()` failure: PostgreSQL will no longer retry calling `fsync()` but instead will panic. In this case, PostgreSQL can then replay the data from the write-ahead log (WAL) to help ensure the data is written. While this may appear to be a suboptimal solution, there are presently few alternatives and, based on reports, the problem case occurs extremely rarely.

Shouldn't we mention that previous behavior (retrying fsync) can be
chosen by a new GUC parameter?

Ah, I had that in my original copy and accidentally took it out. I have
added it back in, basically taking the exact language from the release
notes.

Per that and other feedback, I have attached v2.

Thanks so much for your quick responses.

Jonathan

Attachments:

20190214updaterelease.mdtext/markdown; name=20190214updaterelease.md; x-mac-creator=0; x-mac-type=0Download
#7Michael Banck
mbanck@gmx.net
In reply to: Jonathan S. Katz (#3)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

Hi,

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:14:55PM -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

On 2/13/19 4:13 AM, Chapman Flack wrote:

On 02/12/19 22:00, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

Attached is a draft of the press release for the upcoming 2019-02-14
release. Feedback & suggestions are welcome.

----
Users on PostgreSQL 9.4 should plan to upgrade to a supported version of
PostgreSQL as the community will stop releasing fixes for it on February 12,
2019. Please see our [versioning
policy](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/)
----

Should that be February 13, 2020? That's what the linked page says for 9.4.

February 12, 2019 would be (a) today, and (b) in the past for this press
release.

Yes, good catch. Fixed.

Does it make sense to ring the alarm already, one year in advance? I
haven't checked what we have been doing in the past, but now that we
established the 9.4 EOL is well off, it might make those people weary
that just managed to get rif off all their 9.3 instances last month...

Michael

#8Jonathan S. Katz
jkatz@postgresql.org
In reply to: Michael Banck (#7)
Re: 2019-02-14 Press Release Draft

On 2/13/19 8:15 AM, Michael Banck wrote:

Hi,

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:14:55PM -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

On 2/13/19 4:13 AM, Chapman Flack wrote:

On 02/12/19 22:00, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

Attached is a draft of the press release for the upcoming 2019-02-14
release. Feedback & suggestions are welcome.

----
Users on PostgreSQL 9.4 should plan to upgrade to a supported version of
PostgreSQL as the community will stop releasing fixes for it on February 12,
2019. Please see our [versioning
policy](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/)
----

Should that be February 13, 2020? That's what the linked page says for 9.4.

February 12, 2019 would be (a) today, and (b) in the past for this press
release.

Yes, good catch. Fixed.

Does it make sense to ring the alarm already, one year in advance? I
haven't checked what we have been doing in the past, but now that we
established the 9.4 EOL is well off, it might make those people weary

With the fixed end dates in place[1]https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/, the change in major version
numbers, and having a few announcements leading up to the EOL were
missed last year (IIRC we gave one warning), we wanted to provide more
advanced warning about the next EOL of a version.

That said, reading it without tired eyes, the language could come across
as being alarmist, which is not the case. Maybe something like:

==snip==
PostgreSQL 9.4 will stop receiving fixes on February 12, 2020. Please
see our [versioning
policy](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/) for more
information.
==snip==

and subsequent releases can gradually increase the language.

Thanks,

Jonathan

[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/