Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 6.5.2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Keith Parks <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
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 21:32:12
Message-ID: 20536.938813532@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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?

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-10-01 21:38:59 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 6.5.2
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-10-01 20:11:28 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 6.5.2