On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Erik Rijkers <e...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, January 3, 2014 00:09, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>
>
> > connection to server was lost
> >
> > So, to repeat, this runs fine on a server compiled for speed.
> >
>
> I forgot to append the log messages:
>
> 2014-01-03 00:19:17.073 CET 14054 LOG: database system is ready to accept
> connections
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(!((bool) ((invtransfn_oid) != ((Oid) 0))))",
> File: "parse_agg.c", Line: 1255)
> 2014-01-03 00:19:29.605 CET 14054 LOG: server process (PID 14143) was
> terminated by signal 6: Aborted
> 2014-01-03 00:19:29.605 CET 14054 DETAIL: Failed process was running:
> SELECT depname, empno, salary, sum(salary) OVER
> (PARTITION BY depname) FROM empsalary ORDER BY depname, salary;
> 2014-01-03 00:19:29.605 CET 14054 LOG: terminating any other active
> server processes
> 2014-01-03 00:19:29.607 CET 14054 LOG: all server processes terminated;
> reinitializing
> etc. etc.
>
>
>
hmm, yeah, compiling and testing a build with assets enabled... That's a
good idea!
I probably should have tried that :)
I've attached another patch which should fix this problem.
The single failing SUM(numeric) regression test is still in there and it is
a known failure to do the extra trailing zeros that it can now produce that
would not be present in an unpatched version. It's there purely in the hope
to generate some discussion about it to find out if we can use inverse
transitions for sum(numeric) or not.
Regards
David Rowley
inverse_transition_functions_v1.9.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
