Обсуждение: VALIDATE CONSTRAINT
Is there a reason, besides simple oversight, that commit 073d7cb513f5de44530f4bdbaaa4b5d4cce5f984 was not backpatched? I think it needs to be. -- Vik
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
Fix docs on lock level for ALTER TABLE VALIDATE
ALTER TABLE .. VALIDATE CONSTRAINT previously
gave incorrect details about lock levels and
therefore incomplete reasons to use the option.
Initial bug report and fix from Marko Tiikkaja
Reworded by me to include comments by Kevin Grittner
regards, tom lane
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.html http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-altertable.html -- Vik
Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com> writes: > 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? >> AFAICS, it was. > 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.html > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-altertable.html The website has the docs as of the latest releases, and we've not issued any new minor releases since April. (Yeah, we're overdue.) regards, tom lane
On 09/02/2013 06:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > The website has the docs as of the latest releases, and we've not > issued any new minor releases since April. (Yeah, we're overdue.) That does indeed explain it. Thanks. -- Vik