aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
-rw-r--r--doc/src/sgml/release-14.sgml89
1 files changed, 45 insertions, 44 deletions
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/release-14.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/release-14.sgml
index 82f961d2281..d824d2d8885 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/release-14.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/release-14.sgml
@@ -42,29 +42,6 @@
<listitem>
<!--
-Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
-Branch: master [18b87b201] 2022-01-13 18:13:41 -0800
-Branch: REL_14_STABLE [dad1539ae] 2022-01-14 10:56:12 -0800
--->
- <para>
- Fix corruption of HOT chains when a RECENTLY_DEAD tuple changes
- state to fully DEAD during page pruning (Andres Freund)
- </para>
-
- <para>
- This happens when the last transaction that could <quote>see</quote>
- the tuple ends while the page is being pruned. It was then possible
- to remove a tuple that is pointed to by a redirect item elsewhere on
- the page. While that causes no immediate problem, when the item slot
- is re-used by some new tuple, that tuple would be thought to be part
- of the pre-existing HOT chain, creating a form of index corruption.
- If this seems to have affected a table, <command>REINDEX</command>
- should repair the damage.
- </para>
- </listitem>
-
- <listitem>
-<!--
Author: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Branch: master [f99870dd8] 2021-12-08 11:01:08 +0900
Branch: REL_14_STABLE [64ab21f0e] 2021-12-08 11:01:14 +0900
@@ -90,6 +67,30 @@ Branch: REL_12_STABLE [5ed74d874] 2021-12-08 11:01:23 +0900
<listitem>
<!--
+Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
+Branch: master [18b87b201] 2022-01-13 18:13:41 -0800
+Branch: REL_14_STABLE [dad1539ae] 2022-01-14 10:56:12 -0800
+-->
+ <para>
+ Fix corruption of HOT chains when a RECENTLY_DEAD tuple changes
+ state to fully DEAD during page pruning (Andres Freund)
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ It was possible for <command>VACUUM</command> to remove a
+ recently-dead tuple while leaving behind a redirect item that
+ pointed to it. When the tuple's item slot is later re-used by
+ some new tuple, that tuple would be seen as part of the
+ pre-existing HOT chain, creating a form of index corruption.
+ If this has happened, reindexing the table should repair the
+ damage. However, this is an extremely low-probability scenario,
+ so we do not recommend reindexing just on the chance that it might
+ have happened.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+
+ <listitem>
+<!--
Author: Etsuro Fujita <efujita@postgresql.org>
Branch: master [f862d5705] 2022-02-03 15:15:00 +0900
Branch: REL_14_STABLE [7b0cec2fa] 2022-02-03 15:15:01 +0900
@@ -446,9 +447,11 @@ Branch: REL_10_STABLE [9211c2e38] 2022-01-15 18:30:45 +0100
A previous bug fix disabled building of extended statistics for
old-style inheritance trees, but it also prevented building them for
partitioned tables, which was an unnecessary restriction.
- If you have created statistics objects for partitioned tables, you
- may wish to explicitly <command>ANALYZE</command> those tables after
- installing this update, rather than waiting for auto-analyze to do it.
+ This change allows <command>ANALYZE</command> to compute values for
+ statistics objects for partitioned tables. (But note that
+ autovacuum does not process partitioned tables as such, so you must
+ periodically issue manual <command>ANALYZE</command> on the
+ partitioned table if you want to maintain such statistics.)
</para>
</listitem>
@@ -467,12 +470,10 @@ Branch: REL_10_STABLE [ff0e7c7e8] 2022-01-15 03:05:06 +0100
</para>
<para>
- A previous bug fix disabled building of extended statistics for
- old-style inheritance trees, but any existing statistics data was
- not removed, and that data would become more and more out-of-date
- over time. Adjust the planner to ignore such data. Extended
- statistics for the individual child tables are still built and used,
- however.
+ Currently, extended statistics values are only computed locally for
+ each table, not for entire inheritance trees. However the values
+ were mistakenly consulted when planning queries across inheritance
+ trees, possibly resulting in worse-than-default estimates.
</para>
</listitem>
@@ -569,9 +570,9 @@ Branch: master [f4e7ae2b8] 2021-11-20 14:29:56 -0500
Branch: REL_14_STABLE [6d07cbc50] 2021-11-20 14:29:56 -0500
-->
<para>
- Fix failure of SP-GiST indexes when indexed column's data type is
- binary-compatible with the declared input type of the operator class
- (Tom Lane)
+ Fix failure of SP-GiST indexes when the indexed column's data type
+ is binary-compatible with the declared input type of the operator
+ class (Tom Lane)
</para>
<para>
@@ -848,7 +849,7 @@ Branch: REL_10_STABLE [3bc46e4e9] 2021-11-12 14:55:32 -0500
This agrees with the documented behavior, and avoids probable
permissions failure if <command>SET ROLE</command> or <command>SET
SESSION AUTHORIZATION</command> has been done since the session began.
- To reduce confusion, the role name to be acted on is now always
+ To prevent confusion, the role name to be acted on is now
included in the password prompt.
</para>
</listitem>
@@ -1052,14 +1053,14 @@ Branch: REL_10_STABLE [b21986908] 2022-01-08 14:54:39 -0500
<para>
Index-only scans returned column values with trailing spaces
- removed, which is not the expected behavior. That happens because
- that's how it's stored in the index. This fix changes the logic to
- store <type>char(<replaceable>N</replaceable>)</type> values with
- the expected amount of space padding. The behavior of the index
- will not change immediately unless you <command>REINDEX</command>
- it; otherwise space-stripped values will be gradually replaced over
- time during updates. Queries that do not use index-only scan plans
- will be unaffected in any case.
+ removed, which is not the expected behavior. That happened because
+ that's how the data was stored in the index. This fix changes the
+ code to store <type>char(<replaceable>N</replaceable>)</type> values
+ with the expected amount of space padding.
+ The behavior of such an index will not change immediately unless
+ you <command>REINDEX</command> it; otherwise space-stripped values
+ will be gradually replaced over time during updates. Queries that
+ do not use index-only scan plans will be unaffected in any case.
</para>
</listitem>