Remove user_relns() SRF from regression tests.
Back-patch commit 0dba54f1666ead71c54ce100b39efda67596d297 into the older
branches. This test is almost as much of a patching hazard there as it is
in HEAD, and it has no more reason to be needed than it does in HEAD.
I went back as far as 9.2; I ju
Remove user_relns() SRF from regression tests.
Back-patch commit 0dba54f1666ead71c54ce100b39efda67596d297 into the older
branches. This test is almost as much of a patching hazard there as it is
in HEAD, and it has no more reason to be needed than it does in HEAD.
I went back as far as 9.2; I ju
Remove user_relns() SRF from regression tests.
Back-patch commit 0dba54f1666ead71c54ce100b39efda67596d297 into the older
branches. This test is almost as much of a patching hazard there as it is
in HEAD, and it has no more reason to be needed than it does in HEAD.
I went back as far as 9.2; I ju
Remove user_relns() SRF from regression tests.
Back-patch commit 0dba54f1666ead71c54ce100b39efda67596d297 into the older
branches. This test is almost as much of a patching hazard there as it is
in HEAD, and it has no more reason to be needed than it does in HEAD.
I went back as far as 9.2; I ju
Remove user_relns() SRF from regression tests.
Back-patch commit 0dba54f1666ead71c54ce100b39efda67596d297 into the older
branches. This test is almost as much of a patching hazard there as it is
in HEAD, and it has no more reason to be needed than it does in HEAD.
I went back as far as 9.2; I ju
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints.
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints.
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints.
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints.
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints.
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints.
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both
11 matches
Mail list logo
