| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: another plperl bug |
| Date: | 2004-11-23 19:12:46 |
| Message-ID: | 28994.1101237166@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 11:37:22AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I would add these test cases to the regression test were it not that the
>> addresses are machine-dependent...
> I haven't looked into how the regression tests work -- can test
> output be post-processed before comparision with expected results?
No, it's just a plain "diff". If it seemed worth the trouble,
I'd put the hackery right into the SQL:
select perl_func()::text ~ 'ARRAY\\(0x[0-9a-f]+\\)';
but it doesn't really seem worth it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Seymour | 2004-11-23 19:37:02 | Re: OpenBSD/Sparc status |
| Previous Message | Richard Poole | 2004-11-23 19:00:19 | Re: another plperl bug |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-11-23 19:47:25 | Re: another plperl bug |
| Previous Message | Richard Poole | 2004-11-23 19:00:19 | Re: another plperl bug |