Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Unless that has somehow got screwed up I can't see how Tom's theory of a
>> possibly left over .bki file can stand up.
>>
>
> Well, I tried inserting a .bki file from April 30 into a HEAD
> installation, and that made it dump core during bootstrap, so that
> offhand theory was wrong.
>
> However, when I run the HEAD regression tests against that entire
> April 30 installation tree, I can duplicate the baiji regression diffs
> almost exactly --- the polymorphism test fails for me where it succeeds
> on baiji, which I think indicate that baiji has the patch I applied on
> May 1 for SQL function inlining.
>
> So I now state fairly confidently that baiji is failing to overwrite
> *any* of the installation tree, /share and /bin both, and instead is
> testing an installation dating from sometime between May 1 and May 11.
> Have there been any recent changes in either the buildfarm script or
> the MSVC install code that might have changed where the install is
> supposed to go?
>
>

Not to my knowledge, but I have no method of testing what's going on,
and I hate guessing like this - in fact this is what has worried me all
along about supporting MSVC builds - we always said we didn't want to
have to have 2 build environments, but now we have two and we'll be
supporting them forever, even though one of them is not used by 95% of
our developers. I realise that MSVC builds are likely to perform better,
but we have now got a situation where we are likely to have breakage on
a regular basis, ISTM.

(sorry to grumble - it's been a very frustrating 24 hours)

cheers

andrew