PostgreSQL v7.4 Released

After almost 12 months of intense development, and testing, we are proud
to announce the availability of PostgreSQL v7.4.

An overview of the major changes in v7.4 include:

IN/NOT IN subqueries are now much more efficient
Improved GROUP BY processing by using hash buckets
New multikey hash join capability
Queries using the explicit JOIN syntax are now better optimized
Faster and more powerful regular expression code
Function-inlining for simple SQL functions
Full support for IPv6 connections and IPv6 address data types
Major improvements in SSL performance and reliability
Make free space map efficiently reuse empty index pages, and other
SQL-standard information schema
Cursors conform more closely to the SQL standard
Cursors can exist outside transactions
New client-to-server protocol
libpq and ECPG applications are now fully thread-safe
New version of full-text indexing
New autovacuum tool
Array handling has been improved and moved into the server core

For a full listing of what has changed between v7.3 and v7.4, please see
the HISTORY file available at:

http://developer.postgresql.org/~momjian/HISTORY.html

For a look at the Official Press Release that our Advocacy team *slaved*
over for the many weeks preceeding the release, it is available at:

http://www.postgresql.org/presskit/en/presskit74.html

For this release, we have two primary methods of downloading, in two
different formats ...

For those using BitTorrent (http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/), we have
setup a BitTorrent server at:

http://bt.postgresql.org

For those using FTP, please see our listing of mirror sites for a location
near you:

http://www.postgresql.org/mirrors-www.html

And, due to popular demand over the years, we've finally given in and are
offering both .gz and .bz versions, both through FTP and BitTorrent.

Any questions/problems with release, please report them, as always, to
pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org(dot)

Marc G. Fournier
Coordinator
PostgreSQL Global Development Group

Marc G. Fournier writes:

> After almost 12 months of intense development, and testing, we are proud
> to announce the availability of PostgreSQL v7.4.

And when will the coordinator learn that it is called "PostgreSQL 7.4" and
not "PostgreSQL v7.4"?

> For a full listing of what has changed between v7.3 and v7.4, please see
> the HISTORY file available at:
>
> http://developer.postgresql.org/~momjian/HISTORY.html

Better known as

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/release.html

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > After almost 12 months of intense development, and testing, we are proud
> > to announce the availability of PostgreSQL v7.4.
>
> And when will the coordinator learn that it is called "PostgreSQL 7.4" and
> not "PostgreSQL v7.4"?

Habit :)

Marc G. Fournier writes:

> > And when will the coordinator learn that it is called "PostgreSQL 7.4" and
> > not "PostgreSQL v7.4"?
>
> Habit :)

I would appreciate it if you could abandon that habit and stop making us
look like losers.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

Interesting, I see the difference between "PostgreSQL v7.4 Released" and
"PostgreSQL 7.4 Released".

But I didn't perceive a "loser" until the Postgres team started squabbling
amongst themselves on a public forum about it.

Terry Fielder
Manager Software Development and Deployment
Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
terry(at)greatgulfhomes(dot)com
Fax: (416) 441-9085

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Peter
> Eisentraut
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 6:35 PM
> To: Marc G. Fournier
> Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL v7.4 Released
>
>
> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > > And when will the coordinator learn that it is called
> "PostgreSQL 7.4" and
> > > not "PostgreSQL v7.4"?
> >
> > Habit :)
>
> I would appreciate it if you could abandon that habit and
> stop making us
> look like losers.
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to
> majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 15:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> I would appreciate it if you could abandon that habit and stop making us
> look like losers.

Losers? PostgreSQL is way too good for it to be the product of losers.
My Oracle-bound comrades have drooled over things like table inheritance
and server-side functions in perl and python. I can tell you that
they're the ones who've felt like they're losing something.

Hackers, thanks again for 7.4 (and Marc, thanks for v7.4).

-Reece

--
Reece Hart, http://www.in-machina.com/~reece/, GPG:0x25EC91A0

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > > And when will the coordinator learn that it is called "PostgreSQL 7.4" and
> > > not "PostgreSQL v7.4"?
> >
> > Habit :)
>
> I would appreciate it if you could abandon that habit and stop making us
> look like losers.

Odd that you are the only one that *ever* seems to take offence at it ...
*shrug*

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 terry(at)ashtonwoodshomes(dot)com wrote:

> Interesting, I see the difference between "PostgreSQL v7.4 Released" and
> "PostgreSQL 7.4 Released".

And, until Peter pointed it out to you, did you notice the difference?

terry(at)ashtonwoodshomes(dot)com wrote:

>Interesting, I see the difference between "PostgreSQL v7.4 Released" and
>"PostgreSQL 7.4 Released".
>
>But I didn't perceive a "loser" until the Postgres team started squabbling
>amongst themselves on a public forum about it.
>
>

No losers here :-)

Great job guys !

.Sig - Speeling impaired welcome here.

Not really, and still don't care either way.

Postgres *is* a superior product, I have used many different DB's, and will
continue to stick by Postgres. And THAT is what makes Postgres stand out
from the rest: let's get over it.

Terry Fielder
Manager Software Development and Deployment
Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
terry(at)greatgulfhomes(dot)com
Fax: (416) 441-9085

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc G. Fournier [mailto:scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org]
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 7:49 PM
> To: terry(at)ashtonwoodshomes(dot)com
> Cc: 'Peter Eisentraut'; 'Marc G. Fournier';
> pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: RE: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL v7.4 Released
>
>
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 terry(at)ashtonwoodshomes(dot)com wrote:
>
> > Interesting, I see the difference between "PostgreSQL v7.4
> Released" and
> > "PostgreSQL 7.4 Released".
>
> And, until Peter pointed it out to you, did you notice the difference?
>

Marc G. Fournier writes:

> Odd that you are the only one that *ever* seems to take offence at it ...
> *shrug*

Here it's just the release announcements that make us look like some kind
of weirdos. But when you're making tarballs like erserver_v1.2.tar.gz
then you're not only making a fool of yourself, you're creating actual
technical problems. I take offense at it because for years you've simply
ignored all requests to do something about it. But I'm certainly not the
only one who considers it odd.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

>>I would appreciate it if you could abandon that habit and stop making us
>>look like losers.
>>
>>
>
>Odd that you are the only one that *ever* seems to take offence at it ...
>*shrug*
>
>
>
I don't even understand why we are declaring a difference. Is it not v7.4?

>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
>

--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-222-2783 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Editor-N-Chief - PostgreSQl.Org - http://www.postgresql.org

Here it's just the release announcements that make us look like some kind

>of weirdos. But when you're making tarballs like erserver_v1.2.tar.gz
>then you're not only making a fool of yourself, you're creating actual
>technical problems. I take offense at it because for years you've simply
>ignored all requests to do something about it. But I'm certainly not the
>only one who considers it odd.
>
>
>
Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
we have a v in front of the version number?

Sincerely,

Joshua Drake

--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-222-2783 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Editor-N-Chief - PostgreSQl.Org - http://www.postgresql.org

Joshua D. Drake writes:

> Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> we have a v in front of the version number?

Packaging tools, packaging standards, convention, consistency of public
presentation.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Here it's just the release announcements that make us look like some kind
>
> >of weirdos. But when you're making tarballs like erserver_v1.2.tar.gz
> >then you're not only making a fool of yourself, you're creating actual
> >technical problems. I take offense at it because for years you've simply
> >ignored all requests to do something about it. But I'm certainly not the
> >only one who considers it odd.
> >
> >
> >
> Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> we have a v in front of the version number?

*shrug* v == version ... maybe its offending Peter that I'm being
redundant or something? Stating the obvious by putting the v in front of
the version #?

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Joshua D. Drake writes:
>
> > Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> > we have a v in front of the version number?
>
> Packaging tools, packaging standards, convention, consistency of public
> presentation.

Packaging has always been straight:

svr1# ls -l */postgresql-7.?.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r-- 1 pgsql pgsql 9173732 May 9 2000 v7.0/postgresql-7.0.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 pgsql pgsql 8088678 Apr 13 2001 v7.1/postgresql-7.1.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 pgsql pgsql 9180168 Feb 4 2002 v7.2/postgresql-7.2.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 pgsql pgsql 11059455 Nov 27 2002 v7.3/postgresql-7.3.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 pgsql pgsql 12311256 Nov 16 17:57 v7.4/postgresql-7.4.tar.gz

Its just in the text/subjects that I put the v ... *shrug*

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Here it's just the release announcements that make us look like some kind
>
> >of weirdos. But when you're making tarballs like erserver_v1.2.tar.gz
> >then you're not only making a fool of yourself, you're creating actual
> >technical problems. I take offense at it because for years you've simply
> >ignored all requests to do something about it. But I'm certainly not the
> >only one who considers it odd.
> >
> >
> >
> Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> we have a v in front of the version number?

I certainly don't mind the v, or I vertainly don't vind the v. :-)

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 01:55, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> we have a v in front of the version number?

It isn't standard practice. I agree with Peter on this.

Also, as I have asked before, please make sure that future releases sort
in the correct order. It makes life much easier for those of us who
make packages and the many users who install packages.

The cycle of releases we have had were:
7.4beta[1-5]
7.4RC[12]
7.4

These sort in reverse (ASCII) order to their real priority.

So the series of Debian packages were numbered:
7.3.99.7.4beta[1-5]
7.3.99.7.4rc[12]
7.4

I hope users who were tracking these understood the relationship between
Marc's numbers and mine.

--
Oliver Elphick Oliver(dot)Elphick(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk
Isle of Wight, UK http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
========================================
"A Song for the sabbath day. It is a good thing to
give thanks unto the LORD, and to sing praises unto
thy name, O most High." Psalms 92:1

> > Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> > we have a v in front of the version number?
>
> It isn't standard practice. I agree with Peter on this.
>
> Also, as I have asked before, please make sure that future releases sort
> in the correct order. It makes life much easier for those of us who
> make packages and the many users who install packages.
>
> The cycle of releases we have had were:
> 7.4beta[1-5]
> 7.4RC[12]
> 7.4
>
> These sort in reverse (ASCII) order to their real priority.
>
> So the series of Debian packages were numbered:
> 7.3.99.7.4beta[1-5]
> 7.3.99.7.4rc[12]
> 7.4
>
> I hope users who were tracking these understood the relationship between
> Marc's numbers and mine.

Agreed, I'd like to see the v dropped from everything as well. It's
not crucial, but I've stumbled over it numerous times. -sc

--
Sean Chittenden

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Sean Chittenden wrote:

> > > Somebody please explain to me what the hell a difference it makes if
> > > we have a v in front of the version number?
> >
> > It isn't standard practice. I agree with Peter on this.
> >
> > Also, as I have asked before, please make sure that future releases sort
> > in the correct order. It makes life much easier for those of us who
> > make packages and the many users who install packages.
> >
> > The cycle of releases we have had were:
> > 7.4beta[1-5]
> > 7.4RC[12]
> > 7.4
> >
> > These sort in reverse (ASCII) order to their real priority.
> >
> > So the series of Debian packages were numbered:
> > 7.3.99.7.4beta[1-5]
> > 7.3.99.7.4rc[12]
> > 7.4
> >
> > I hope users who were tracking these understood the relationship between
> > Marc's numbers and mine.
>
> Agreed, I'd like to see the v dropped from everything as well. It's
> not crucial, but I've stumbled over it numerous times. -sc

But there is no v in any of the release files ... just checked to make
sure, and even the 6.x branch didn't have any v in the file names ... the
only place I've ever used the 'v' is in emails ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
>> Odd that you are the only one that *ever* seems to take offence at it ...
>> *shrug*
>
> Here it's just the release announcements that make us look like some kind
> of weirdos. But when you're making tarballs like erserver_v1.2.tar.gz
> then you're not only making a fool of yourself, you're creating actual
> technical problems. I take offense at it because for years you've simply
> ignored all requests to do something about it. But I'm certainly not the
> only one who considers it odd.
>

And you think this kind of infight "about file naming" on the general
mailing list is making us look good? Think again ...

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> Also, as I have asked before, please make sure that future releases sort
>> in the correct order. It makes life much easier for those of us who
>> make packages and the many users who install packages.

> But there is no v in any of the release files ... just checked to make
> sure, and even the 6.x branch didn't have any v in the file names ... the
> only place I've ever used the 'v' is in emails ...

Yeah. I think it matters not in text messages. Peter has a point about
paying attention to the ASCII sort ordering of version labels that are
used in filenames, CVS tags, etc.

regards, tom lane

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> >> Also, as I have asked before, please make sure that future releases sort
> >> in the correct order. It makes life much easier for those of us who
> >> make packages and the many users who install packages.
>
> > But there is no v in any of the release files ... just checked to make
> > sure, and even the 6.x branch didn't have any v in the file names ... the
> > only place I've ever used the 'v' is in emails ...
>
> Yeah. I think it matters not in text messages. Peter has a point about
> paying attention to the ASCII sort ordering of version labels that are
> used in filenames, CVS tags, etc.

Yup, and as I mentioned to Peter in a private email ... telling me this
when I announce that I've bundled said files and am asking for
confirmation is more useful then waiting until the end of the cycle and
have released the final product :(

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664