Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.600.62\))
Subject: Re: Joe Hellerstein's "Looking Back at Postgres" paper
From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
In-Reply-To: <3345678.1720071633@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 09:06:54 +0200
Cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <29108CAC-2CFB-470D-A3DC-E666C12EF4E4@yesql.se>
References: <3345678.1720071633@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/29108CAC-2CFB-470D-A3DC-E666C12EF4E4%40yesql.se>
Precedence: bulk

> On 4 Jul 2024, at 07:40, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>=20
> I happened to come across this:
>=20
> https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.01973
>=20
> I found this to be really interesting reading, so I wonder if
> we shouldn't cite it in history.sgml or some such place.

It's a really good read, +1 for referencing it in history.sgml.  I would
probably have placed it at the tail end of 2.1 to wrap up that section =
or at
the very end.

Unrelated to that, but reading history.sgml I found this sentend at the =
end of
the page to be sort of misleading:

	"Details about what has happened in PostgreSQL since then can be =
found
	in Appendix E."

While technically true, it seems a bit overpromising in a history =
section to
refer to the release notes which are written in a very different way =
from the
prose here (and the release notes are not even in Appendix E anymore).

--
Daniel Gustafsson