Re: Request for supported platforms

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Request for supported platforms
Date: 2002-10-30 22:24:26
Message-ID: 200210302224.g9UMOQP25025@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


I have reviewed your diff and found that it was either timezone changes
or join.sql which I have recently fixed. Can you grab current CVS
snapshot and try again?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ian Barwick wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 October 2002 01:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Sorry, Ian, here is the patch I applied. You can apply this to whatever
> > version you are using and test Irix with that, rather than having to
> > grab CVS.
>
> OK, I have carried out make check with the updated tests but
> got FAILED on the same four tests (abstime, tinterval, horology, join).
>
> The failures are subtly different (see here for new regression diff):
>
> http://home.akademie.de/~IBarwick/IRIX_65_1.regression.diffs
>
> Having looked at them again I see the following:
> - in horology the timestamp tests seem to have succeeded (presumably
> the previous failures were triggered by the change to winter time);
> - the tests which are still failing in abstime, tinterval and horology
> all refer to dates before 1970, where AFAICS they are all out by one hour;
> possibly this explanation?:
>
> "Some systems using older time zone libraries fail to apply daylight-saving
> corrections to dates before 1970, causing pre-1970 PDT times to be displayed
> in PST instead. This will result in localized differences in the test
> results."
>
> (cf. http://www.postgresql.org/idocs/index.php?regress-evaluation.html );
>
> - the join tests are failing slightly differently; I would suggest that
> this is because the ORDER BY is still not explicit enough, and for what
> ever reason under IRIX the undefined result row orderings are in a different
> order to every other platform...
>
> e.g. with this statement:
>
> SELECT '' AS "xxx", J1_TBL.i, j, t, k
> FROM J1_TBL LEFT OUTER JOIN J2_TBL USING (i)
> ORDER BY i;
>
> xxx | i | j | t | k
> -----+---+---+-------+----
> | 0 | | zero |
> | 1 | 4 | one | -1
> | 2 | 3 | two | 2
> | 2 | 3 | two | 4
> | 3 | 2 | three | -3
> | 4 | 1 | four |
> | 5 | 0 | five | -5
> | 5 | 0 | five | -5
> | 6 | 6 | six |
> | 7 | 7 | seven |
> | 8 | 8 | eight |
> | | 0 | zero |
> | | | null |
> (13 rows)
>
> the order of the last two rows is not defined. The expected order
> according to the regression tests is:
>
> | | | null |
> | | 0 | zero |
>
>
>
> Ian Barwick
> barwick(at)gmx(dot)net
>
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Clift 2002-10-30 23:01:31 Swedish version of the PostgreSQL "Advocacy and Marketing" site is ready
Previous Message Oliver Elphick 2002-10-30 22:23:10 7.3b3 Regression tests passed on i386 Debian