PostgreSQL 8.3 Released

jadavis writes "The release of the long-awaited PostgreSQL version 8.3 has been announced. The new feature list includes HOT, which dramatically improves performance for databases with high update activity; asynchronous commit; built-in full text search; large database features such as synchronized scans and reduced storage overhead; built-in SQL/XML support; spread checkpoints; and many more (too many major new features to list here). See the release notes for full details."

Comments

PostegreSQL 8.3?

[Anonymous Coward]

Would that be POSTGR~1.SQL?

Re:Nice.

[Seumas]

8.3 had me at "full-text search".

Now, please excuse me while Postgres 8.3 and I go take a little alone-time in a dark closet.

Re:asynchronous committ

[RelliK]

SQL already allows you to drop to READ_UNCOMMITTED if you really really want to -- though the DB actually under no obligation to drop to that level, you're just specifying that you don't care. That removes A, C, and I all at once. Why not make the D part optional too?

False. SQL standard explicitly specifies that writing to the database under READ UNCOMMITTED isolation is not allowed. You can only do read-only queries. Further, PostgreSQL doesn't even support READ UNCOMMITTED. There is no need for it. PostgreSQL implements MVCC such that each transaction gets a private snapshot of the database. With that you get READ COMMITTED for free.

I'm with the original poster here. Asynchronous transactions seem like a bad idea. But then it's not PostgreSQL's responsibility to enforce good software design. And maybe in some corner cases people can find use for them.

Re:New HOT, faster Postgres

[naasking]

Yeah, if only for those darn inconvenient facts demonstrating that PostgreSQL is faster than MySQL, particularly under load. Note that the benchmark was PostgreSQL 8.2. Now note that 8.3 is up to twice as fast as 8.2. I think the polarity on your order of magnitude performance difference should be reversed.

Of course, if you actually care about data integrity and database features, there's not contest at all. But the performance gap is now non-existent, if not completely reversed.

Re:Will it be used?

[ByteSlicer]

That, and people are more likely to remember 'My' than 'Postgre'.

You are on to something.

[NotQuiteReal]

If PostgreSQL changed their name to OurSQL it would be easy to remember, and a sound a lot less selfish than MySQL.

Re:Will it be used?

[Plaid Phantom]

You have a 100 GB database and you're not concerned with stability??

Do you work for the government?