On 09/02/2013 04:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com> writes:
>> Is there a reason, besides simple oversight, that commit
>> 073d7cb513f5de44530f4bdbaaa4b5d4cce5f984 was not backpatched?
>> I think it needs to be.
> AFAICS, it was.
>
> Author: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
> Branch: master [073d7cb51] 2013-06-18 12:09:39 +0100
> Branch: REL9_3_STABLE [0ae1bf8c1] 2013-06-18 12:10:10 +0100
> Branch: REL9_2_STABLE [20a562f91] 2013-06-18 12:00:32 +0100
> Branch: REL9_1_STABLE [be039d4b2] 2013-06-18 12:05:48 +0100
That does seem to indicate it was. But it doesn't seem they made it to
the website:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/sql-altertable.htmlhttp://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-altertable.html
--
Vik