Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: NaN/Inf fix for ECPG

From: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Rémi Zara <remi_zara(at)mac(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: NaN/Inf fix for ECPG
Date: 2010-02-25 12:26:34
Message-ID: 4B866C7A.20403@cybertec.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> As Rémi says, isnan((double)(0.0 / 0.0)) == true for him.
> Michael: IIRC, IEEE754 explicit about that the (0.0/0.0) division
> produces NaN. How about doing it explicitely in ECPG?
>   

I came up with three patches, they are attached.

Can you try whether the first patch (missing float.h from data.c)
solves the problem? And together with the 2nd one? In that
patch I fixed the order of float.h and math.h in nan_test.pgc,
which is the opposite of the order found in e.g. backend/utils/adt/float.c.

The 3rd patch is explicit about NetBSD/mips but it doesn't feel right.

They are working on Linux/x86-64 and NetBSD/x86-64. Can you try
the combinations below on "pika" outside the buildfarm whether they
still fail the ECPG make check?
- patch 1 by itself (12a)
- patch 1+2 (12a + 12-regr)
- patch 3 with/without 1+2

Sorry to give you work, but we don't have a mips machine.

Thanks in advance,
Zoltán Böszörményi

-- 
Bible has answers for everything. Proof:
"But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more
than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:37) - basics of digital technology.
"May your kingdom come" - superficial description of plate tectonics

----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
http://www.postgresql.at/


Attachment: pg85-ecpg-fix-nan-inf-12-ctxdiff.patch
Description: text/x-patch (540 bytes)
Attachment: pg85-ecpg-fix-nan-inf-12-regr-ctxdiff.patch
Description: text/x-patch (1.3 KB)
Attachment: pg85-ecpg-fix-nan-inf-12a-ctxdiff.patch
Description: text/x-patch (322 bytes)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-02-25 13:27:21
Subject: Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-02-25 12:18:27
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group