Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Call for porting reports

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Call for porting reports
Date: 2000-04-02 21:37:43
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> I am now reproduceably getting this failure in the timestamp test. I have
> never seen it before today:...
> The catch is that this *always* happens in the (parallel) regression tests
> but not if I run the file through psql by hand. Gives me a warm feeling
> ... :(

Almost certainly due to daylight savings time in PST8PDT (it happened
today). As the doctor says, you'll feel better in a couple of days :)

This happens every year (actually, twice a year). But it would be
wrong to not test the yesterday/today/tomorrow feature at all...

> Furthermore, PostgreSQL doesn't compile with gcc 2.8.1 (never has). I get
> a fatal signal if backend/utils/adt/float.c is compiled with -O2 or
> higher. The offending line is in function
> float64 dpow(float64 arg1, float64 arg2)
> *result = (float64data) pow(tmp1, tmp2);
> Certainly a compiler bug, does anyone have a suggestion how this should be
> handled? Is gcc 2.8.1 in wide-spread use?

I'm guessing that 2.8.x is not in wide-spread use. What platform are
you on? You could force -O0 for your platform, even just for that
directory, as long as you don't disable it for other platform/compiler

                        - Thomas

Thomas Lockhart				lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-04-02 21:40:03
Subject: Re: 7.0 release notes should call out incompatible changes more clearly
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-04-02 21:33:12
Subject: Re: Docs refreshed

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group