Re: [HACKERS] Patch to fix plpython on OS X

On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 07:58:21PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >"Jim C. Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> >>I don't think it's a version issue; cuckoo is at 2.4, platypus used to
> >>be at 2.3 but I upgraded it to 2.4 to see if that was the issue, but
> >>platypus kept working.
> >
> >Hmm ... if it's *not* a version thing then I really do want to know
> >what's causing it. Anyone have an idea why this machine is saying
> >'\u80' where everyone else's python says u'\x80' ?
>
> Another OSX box on buildfarm, wallaroo, is exhibiting the same
> behaviour, albeit currently masked by interval regression failures.

I suspect this is indeed a Python version issue:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-07/msg00669.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-07/msg00684.php

It looks like the Macs have some kind of Python framework that
PL/Python is linking against even if a newer version of Python has
been installed. Unfortunately I don't have a Mac I could use to
do any deeper investigating.

The regression tests that are failing are from the patch I submitted
about a month ago to fix a core dump in PL/Python:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-06/msg00519.php

The tests exercise the error checking that the patch added, doing
things that previously caused a segmentation fault but that now
raise an exception. Should those tests remain in place? If so,
should we rewrite them to avoid the version-specific Python messages
(possibly by wrapping them in a PL/pgSQL function that traps the
errors), or should we just leave the tests alone now that we think
we understand what's happening?

--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/