Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-02 Thread Adrian Maier
On 01/08/06, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Would this do the trick? > > I think Bruce changed the call convention for run_diff ... are you > looking at CVS tip? Otherwise it looks reasonable. You're right. I had forgo

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Would this do the trick? I think Bruce changed the call convention for run_diff ... are you looking at CVS tip? Otherwise it looks reasonable. You're right. I had forgotten to do a cvs update. Fixed and committed. cheer

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Would this do the trick? I think Bruce changed the call convention for run_diff ... are you looking at CVS tip? Otherwise it looks reasonable. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: One other thought I had was that we could have pg_regress always allow a fallback to the canonical result file. Hm, that's a good thought. Want to see how painful it is to code? Would this do the trick? cheers andrew

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> I thought about that too but it seems a very bad idea. small-is-zero is >> distinctly "less correct" than the regular output, and I don't think we >> want pg_regress to be blindly accepting it as OK on any platform. > Yes, good point

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Maybe we need to abandon trying to map float8 results exactly in the resultmap file, and just let pg_regress pick the best fit as we do with some other tests. I thought about that too but it seems a very bad idea. small-is-ze

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Adrian Maier
On 01/08/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Maybe we need to abandon trying to map float8 results exactly in the > resultmap file, and just let pg_regress pick the best fit as we do with > some other tests. I thought about that too but it seems a

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Maybe we need to abandon trying to map float8 results exactly in the > resultmap file, and just let pg_regress pick the best fit as we do with > some other tests. I thought about that too but it seems a very bad idea. small-is-zero is distinctly "les

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Tom Lane
[ re cassowary buildfarm failure ] "Adrian Maier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 20/07/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As for the regression test failure, it's odd because it looks to me that >> the actual test output is an exact match to the default "float8.out" >> file. I'm not sur

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Adrian Maier
On 01/08/06, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Adrian Maier wrote: > On 20/07/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Apparently the regression test is comparing the results/float8.out > with expected/float8-small-is-zero.out because of the following line > in > src/test/regress/res

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Adrian Maier wrote: On 20/07/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > BTW: HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 is defined, so INT64_IS_BUSTED is defined also. You sure? INT64_IS_BUSTED should *not* be set in that case --- it's only supposed to be set if we couldn't

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-08-01 Thread Adrian Maier
On 20/07/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > BTW: HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 is defined, so INT64_IS_BUSTED is defined also. You sure? INT64_IS_BUSTED should *not* be set in that case --- it's only supposed to be set if we couldn't find any 64-bit-int ty

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-07-20 Thread Tom Lane
Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > BTW: HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 is defined, so INT64_IS_BUSTED is defined also. You sure? INT64_IS_BUSTED should *not* be set in that case --- it's only supposed to be set if we couldn't find any 64-bit-int type at all. As for the regression test failure, it'

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-07-20 Thread Adrian Maier
On 20/07/06, Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks, Which postgresql version? The version is cvs HEAD. Can we have a regular cygwin error report please mailed to cygwin at cygwin.com please. See http://cygwin.com/problems.html (cygcheck -s -v -r > cygcheck.out) Looks like a strtod()

Re: [HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-07-20 Thread Reini Urban
Adrian Maier schrieb: Hello, While setting up a buildfarm installation for cygwin, I've uncountered the following regression failure : float8 ... FAILED == pgsql.3132/src/test/regress/regression.diffs *** ./expected/float8-small-is-zero.outTue Jul 18 09:2

[HACKERS] float8 regression failure (HEAD, cygwin)

2006-07-18 Thread Adrian Maier
Hello, While setting up a buildfarm installation for cygwin, I've uncountered the following regression failure : float8 ... FAILED == pgsql.3132/src/test/regress/regression.diffs *** ./expected/float8-small-is-zero.out Tue Jul 18 09:24:52 2006 --- ./results/fl