Draft back-branch release notes are up
On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 18:23, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
As usual, please send comments/corrections by Sunday.
I noticed only one potential issue.
I see similar (if not duplicate) entries for a "COMMIT AND CHAIN"
issue, committed at nearly the same time, and both by Fujii Masao. Are
these the same / should they be contained in one entry?
+Author: Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org> +Branch: master [8a55cb5ba] 2021-02-19 21:57:52 +0900
+Author: Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org> +Branch: master [fe06819f1] 2021-02-19 22:01:25 +0900
Thanks in advance,
Matthias van de Meent
Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> writes:
I see similar (if not duplicate) entries for a "COMMIT AND CHAIN"
issue, committed at nearly the same time, and both by Fujii Masao. Are
these the same / should they be contained in one entry?
+Author: Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org> +Branch: master [8a55cb5ba] 2021-02-19 21:57:52 +0900
+Author: Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org> +Branch: master [fe06819f1] 2021-02-19 22:01:25 +0900
No, the first is a server bug, the second is a psql bug.
Thanks for looking though!
regards, tom lane
On 5/7/21 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Thanks!
As usual, please send comments/corrections by Sunday.
==snip=
A previous bug fix caused environment variables (such as PGPORT) to
override entries in the service file in this context. Previously, and in
other contexts, the priority is the other way around; so restore that
behavior.
==snip==
s/;/,/ per grammar check.
Otherwise on a quick read, looks good. I'll be reading it more
thoroughly as the day progresses.
Are there going to be any tzdata changes?
Thanks,
Jonathan
"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
Are there going to be any tzdata changes?
Nope, they're still on 2021a:
https://www.iana.org/time-zones
regards, tom lane
On 2021-May-07, Tom Lane wrote:
I suppose you're aware of this, so I just want to get it on record that
this entry
+<!--
+Author: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
+Branch: master [25936fd46] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300
+Branch: REL_13_STABLE [2688852a4] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300
+Branch: REL_12_STABLE [262eb990c] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300
+Branch: REL_11_STABLE [d1c6edd31] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300
+-->
+ <para>
+ Fix use-after-free bug in saving tuples for <literal>AFTER</literal>
+ triggers (Amit Langote)
+ </para>only goes back to 12; the commit to 11 was just to add the test case.
This is obvious if you look at the commit, but if you just look at the
release note entry, that detail might be missed.
The notes look good.
Thanks,
--
�lvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada."
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
I suppose you're aware of this, so I just want to get it on record that
this entry
+<!-- +Author: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> +Branch: master [25936fd46] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300 +Branch: REL_13_STABLE [2688852a4] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300 +Branch: REL_12_STABLE [262eb990c] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300 +Branch: REL_11_STABLE [d1c6edd31] 2021-02-27 18:09:15 -0300 +--> + <para> + Fix use-after-free bug in saving tuples for <literal>AFTER</literal> + triggers (Amit Langote) + </para>
only goes back to 12; the commit to 11 was just to add the test case.
This is obvious if you look at the commit, but if you just look at the
release note entry, that detail might be missed.
Good point. I'll make sure this doesn't get into the v11 notes
(which I probably would have done if you didn't point it out,
so thanks).
regards, tom lane