Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 6.5.2

From: Keith Parks <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 6.5.2
Date: 1999-10-01 22:55:00
Message-ID: 199910012255.XAA02004@mtcc.demon.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
>
>Keith Parks <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>> I'm sure we could get rid of even those errors if we were to
>> incorporate some test like the following and then mangle the
>> expected results accordingly.
>
>I don't see much value in getting rid of the discrepancies in strerror()
>messages unless you have some proposal for getting rid of platform-
>specific float roundoff differences. On my machine, the diffs in the
>float8 and geometry regress tests are *much* larger and much harder to
>validate by eyeball than the piddling little diffs in int2 and int4.
>(I suppose I should submit platform-specific expected files for HPUX,
>but have never gotten round to it...)
>
>However, if people like this approach, why not just print out
>"strerror(ERANGE)" instead of fooling with strtol?

Trust me to make things over complex!!

Keith.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Roland Roberts 1999-10-02 01:58:25 Re: [HACKERS] Re: TO_CHAR()
Previous Message Jackson, DeJuan 1999-10-01 22:27:41 testing unsubscribe