Re: PostgreSQL 17 Beta 1 release announcement draft

[Jonathan S. Katz]

On 5/16/24 1:10 AM, Thom Brown wrote:

On Thu, May 16, 2024, 02:45 Jonathan S. Katz <jk...@postgresql.org <mailto:jk...@postgresql.org>> wrote:

    Hi,

    Attached is a copy of the PostgreSQL 17 Beta 1 release announcement
    draft. This contains a user-facing summary of some of the features that
    will be available in the Beta, as well as a call to test. I've made an
    effort to group them logically around the different workflows they
    affect.

    A few notes:

    * The section with the features is not 80-char delimited. I will do
    that
    before the final copy

    * There is an explicit callout that we've added in the SQL/JSON
    features
    that were previously reverted in PG15. I want to ensure we're
    transparent about that, but also use it as a hook to get people testing.

    When reviewing:

    * Please check for correctness of feature descriptions, keeping in mind
    this is targeted for a general audience

    * Please indicate if you believe there's a notable omission, or if we
    should omit any of these callouts

    * Please indicate if a description is confusing - I'm happy to rewrite
    to ensure it's clearer.

    Please provide feedback no later than Wed 2024-05-22 18:00 UTC. As the
    beta release takes some extra effort, I want to ensure all changes are
    in with time to spare before release day.

"Now as of PostgreSQL 17, you can now use parallel index builds for [BRIN](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/brin.html <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/brin.html>) indexes."

The 2nd "now" is redundant.

"Finally, PostgreSQL 17 adds more explicitly SIMD instructions, including AVX-512 support for the [`bit_count](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/functions-bitstring.html <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/functions-bitstring.html>) function."

Would "SIMD-explicit instructions" be better? Also, I know you may not be using markdown for the final version, but the bit_count backtick isn't matched by a closing backtick. "[`COPY`](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/sql-copy.html <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/sql-copy.html>), used to efficiently bulk load data into PostgreSQL"

Perhaps just add a "which is" before "used"?




"provider", "provides", and "provided" feels too repetitive.

The "used to" makes me stumble into reading it as meaning "it previously could efficiently bulk load data". "PostgreSQL 17 includes a built-in collation provider that provides similar semantics to the `C` collation provided by libc." How about, "PostgreSQL 17 includes a built-in collation provider with semantics similar to the `C` collation offered by libc."?

Jonathan

Thanks - I accepted (with modifications) most of the suggestions here. I'll include in the next version of the draft.

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature