Re: [HACKERS] Regression test status (was type coersion)

From: David Hartwig <daveh(at)insightdist(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Regression test status (was type coersion)
Date: 1998-08-26 19:04:09
Message-ID: 35E45C29.2D25FD42@insightdist.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

> > These results are also correct. Somewhat. I do not know much about
> > datatime porting issues, but if I do a:
> > SELECT d1 FROM DATETIME_TBL
> > I get time reported to the 1/100 of a second. If GROUP BY d1 the
> > hundredths are not shown. Thus, the counts and groupings are correct.
> > Its just not showing the hundredths portion.
>
> The issue here is why you (or whoever it was prepared the regression
> test) got different results from me...
>

I do get the same results - on my RS/6000. And I did not prepare the
test. But, to be more precise:

1. The failure does not indicate any problems w/ the HAVING clause.

2. This test will never work if there is a machine dependence on the
ability to resolve datatime down to the 1/100 second.

3. There appears to be something strange going on in the way GROUPed BY
datetime columns do not display the 1/100 portion of seconds. Is this a
known problem?

Unless someone objects, I will submit a test suit to, at least remove the
false reading on select_having.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Keith Parks 1998-08-26 19:27:54 pg_attribute typo??
Previous Message Michael Meskes 1998-08-26 18:29:49 Re: [HACKERS] getopts include?