Re: First draft of update announcement
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: First draft of update announcement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29427.1395180135@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: First draft of update announcement (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > Updated per feedback. CC'd to Advocacy now for additional corrections. A few thoughts: > The PostgreSQL Global Development Group has released an update to all > supported version of the database system, including versions 9.3.4, 9.2.8, > 9.1.13, 9.0.19, and 8.4.20. By my count, 9.0.17 and 8.4.21 are the correct minor numbers. > The data corruption issue in PostgreSQL 9.3 affects binary replication > standbys, servers being recovered from point-in-time-recovery backup, and > standalone servers which recover from a system crash. The bug causes rows > to vanish from indexes during recovery due to timing issues with updating > locks. Per earlier discussion, I think "vanish from indexes" is a bad choice of wording here: it will make people think they can recover by REINDEXing, which is not the case. I haven't got a great alternative wording though; best I can do offhand is "causes table rows to become unreachable by index scans", which lacks punch. Also, although this isn't too important to users, the problem isn't a "timing issue". How about "... during recovery due to incorrect replay of tuple locking operations", or some such? > For this reason, users are encouraged to take a new base backup of each > of their standby databases after applying the update. "new base backup for", perhaps? With "of", this sounds like you're telling people to make backups from the (corrupted) slave servers. > * Remove ability to execute OVERLAPs with a single argument There wasn't ever any actual ability to execute such calls; there was only some code that tried to support the case and failed miserably. I'm not sure this is worth mentioning in the announcement, really --- but if you do, this is a poor description because it sounds like we removed a usable feature. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: