From: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Failure in commit_ts tap tests |
Date: | 2017-01-21 05:40:48 |
Message-ID: | CABOikdMLJnn4ZvrP055TjuqH=+d+muCfY6i-O8+_34FPQutrAQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>
> Even more interesting, the warning appears as-expected in stripped down
> test cases, eg
>
> $ perl -e 'use warnings; use Test::More; ok("Foo" ne "bar", "ok");'
> ok 1 - ok
> # Tests were run but no plan was declared and done_testing() was not seen.
>
> $ perl -e 'use warnings; use Test::More; ok("Foo" != "bar", "ok");'
> Argument "bar" isn't numeric in numeric ne (!=) at -e line 1.
> Argument "Foo" isn't numeric in numeric ne (!=) at -e line 1.
> not ok 1 - ok
> # Failed test 'ok'
> # at -e line 1.
> # Tests were run but no plan was declared and done_testing() was not seen.
>
> I really don't understand why this complains but the same perl version
> is happy with (the previous coding in) 004_restart.pl. Perl bug?
>
>
I think I understand why it's only affecting me and not others.
I've PGDATESTYLE set to "Postgres, MDY" in my bashrc and that formats the
commit timestamp as "Fri Jan 20 07:59:52.322811 2017 PST". If I unset that,
the result comes in a format such as "2017-01-20 21:31:47.766371-08".
Looks like perl doesn't throw an error if it can parse the leading part of
the string as a numeric. It still throws a warning, but the test passes.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2017-01-21 05:56:18 | Re: pgsql: Logical replication |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-01-21 04:19:28 | Re: pgsql: Logical replication |