Re: regression failure/UnixWare7.1.1/current sources

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: regression failure/UnixWare7.1.1/current sources
Date: 2000-10-30 16:55:01
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0010301750260.777-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Larry Rosenman writes:

> Hmm. I wonder why cc and gcc are doing different math. Wierd.

Not only that, but you get different results with the same compiler
depending on different optimization settings. The joys of binary floating
point...

> I suspect it might have to do with what gcc was compiled on (7.0.x of
> UW). Can we make 2 expected files and have the map file figure it
> out?

The resultmap mechanism isn't really prepared for this yet, but it is
doable I'd say.

> As to the timestamp, can we make a note that on timechange sundays
> don't run the regression test? :-)

We've had a note in there since the last change (April was it?), which was
when I ran into this. :-)

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Larry Rosenman 2000-10-30 16:55:10 Re: CC not getting -O passed?
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-10-30 16:23:34 Re: Current CVS broken?