Re: [HACKERS] Interval aggregate regression failure (expected seems

From: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>
To: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Interval aggregate regression failure (expected seems
Date: 2006-08-29 15:02:41
Message-ID: ED3C135A-9022-4655-AB8C-65658E2567D2@seespotcode.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches


On Aug 29, 2006, at 15:38 , Michael Glaesemann wrote:

> I think I've got it. I plan to update the regression tests this
> evening, but I wanted to post what I believe is a solution.

I've cleaned up the patch a bit in terms of whitespace, comments, and
parens. I've also updated the interval and horology regression tests.
The horology tests needed updating because I added 5 rows to
INTERVAL_TBL. I didn't check the math for every row of time(tz |
stamp | stamptz)/interval arithmetic in the horology tests as I think
problems in this area would have shown up before. Does that make
sense or it just rationalization on my part?

Both with and without --enable-integer-datetimes pass the regression
tests.

Thanks!

Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net

Attachment Content-Type Size
interval_muldiv.patch application/octet-stream 127.3 KB
unknown_filename text/plain 1 byte

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zoltan Boszormenyi 2006-08-29 15:24:13 Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT)
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2006-08-29 14:59:50 GRANT role docs inconsistency

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zoltan Boszormenyi 2006-08-29 15:24:13 Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT)
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-08-29 14:50:29 Re: python / 7.4 / FC5 / x86_64