From: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Interval aggregate regression failure (expected seems |
Date: | 2006-08-29 15:02:41 |
Message-ID: | ED3C135A-9022-4655-AB8C-65658E2567D2@seespotcode.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Aug 29, 2006, at 15:38 , Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> I think I've got it. I plan to update the regression tests this
> evening, but I wanted to post what I believe is a solution.
I've cleaned up the patch a bit in terms of whitespace, comments, and
parens. I've also updated the interval and horology regression tests.
The horology tests needed updating because I added 5 rows to
INTERVAL_TBL. I didn't check the math for every row of time(tz |
stamp | stamptz)/interval arithmetic in the horology tests as I think
problems in this area would have shown up before. Does that make
sense or it just rationalization on my part?
Both with and without --enable-integer-datetimes pass the regression
tests.
Thanks!
Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
interval_muldiv.patch | application/octet-stream | 127.3 KB |
unknown_filename | text/plain | 1 byte |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-29 15:24:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-08-29 14:59:50 | GRANT role docs inconsistency |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-29 15:24:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-29 14:50:29 | Re: python / 7.4 / FC5 / x86_64 |