Horton

Thread

  1. float8 regression test failure in head

    Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> — 2004-03-18T03:32:40Z

    Attached are the test failures I'm currently getting.

-bash-2.05b$ uname -a
FreeBSD mir.internal 4.9-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 4.9-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Sep 
22 14:46:18 WST 2003     adrian@mir.internal:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MIR  i386


Chris

  2. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2004-03-18T03:46:12Z

    Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> Attached are the test failures I'm currently getting.

It looks like Neil didn't update expected/float8-small-is-zero.out
for his recent changes (for which, shame on him).  Would you get
together to verify the correct regression outputs for your platform
and commit the updated expected file?

			regards, tom lane

  3. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> — 2004-03-23T02:34:03Z

    This has not yet been fixed...

Chris

Tom Lane wrote:

> Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> 
>>Attached are the test failures I'm currently getting.
> 
> 
> It looks like Neil didn't update expected/float8-small-is-zero.out
> for his recent changes (for which, shame on him).  Would you get
> together to verify the correct regression outputs for your platform
> and commit the updated expected file?
> 
> 			regards, tom lane

  4. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> — 2004-03-23T04:03:38Z

    Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> This has not yet been fixed...

Attached is a patch for this issue. I've checked with Chris, and this 
patch allows the regression tests to pass on his machine. I also 
updated float8-exp-three-digits expected file, but I wasn't able to 
test these changes (I don't have access to a QNX machine).

I intend to apply this patch tomorrow.

Cheers,

Neil

  5. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2004-03-23T04:29:44Z

    Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Attached is a patch for this issue. I've checked with Chris, and this 
> patch allows the regression tests to pass on his machine. I also 
> updated float8-exp-three-digits expected file, but I wasn't able to 
> test these changes (I don't have access to a QNX machine).

FWIW, my procedure for handling updates in regression tests that have
multiple expected variants is to apply the same diff that occurs on the
machines I can test to the variants I can't test.  It's possible that
this will be wrong, but 99% of the time it's right and it saves followup
work.

An easy way to apply such changes is to feed a default-format diff
output to patch(1):

diff test.myplatform.orig test.myplatform | patch

patch then bleats about not knowing which file to patch, and you
tell it "test.otherplatform".  Works every time ...

			regards, tom lane

  6. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> — 2004-03-24T02:16:08Z

    On 22-Mar-04, at 11:03 PM, Neil Conway wrote:
> Attached is a patch for this issue.

Patch applied to CVS HEAD.

-Neil

  7. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk> — 2006-04-05T14:48:34Z

    On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 11:03:38PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >This has not yet been fixed...
> 
> Attached is a patch for this issue. I've checked with Chris, and this 
> patch allows the regression tests to pass on his machine. I also 
> updated float8-exp-three-digits expected file, but I wasn't able to 
> test these changes (I don't have access to a QNX machine).

Mystery: why I haven't I seen this problem before in the last 2 years...
Anyway, on NetBSD-3.99.17/i386, I need the included patch to pass float8.
float8-small-is-zero_1.out probably needs it too, float8.out and
float8-exp-three-digits-win32.out already look OK.

Cheers,

Patrick

  8. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2006-04-20T10:34:24Z

    Patrick Welche wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 11:03:38PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> > Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > >This has not yet been fixed...
> > 
> > Attached is a patch for this issue. I've checked with Chris, and this 
> > patch allows the regression tests to pass on his machine. I also 
> > updated float8-exp-three-digits expected file, but I wasn't able to 
> > test these changes (I don't have access to a QNX machine).
> 
> Mystery: why I haven't I seen this problem before in the last 2 years...
> Anyway, on NetBSD-3.99.17/i386, I need the included patch to pass float8.
> float8-small-is-zero_1.out probably needs it too, float8.out and
> float8-exp-three-digits-win32.out already look OK.

You realize that all these platforms use the same file:

	float8/i.86-.*-freebsd[234]=float8-small-is-zero
	float8/i.86-.*-openbsd=float8-small-is-zero
	float8/i.86-.*-netbsd=float8-small-is-zero
	float8/m68k-.*-netbsd=float8-small-is-zero

Are we going to have to make a NetBSD/i386-specific file to fix this?
Don't we have some of these platforms on the build farm.  Are they
failing?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

  9. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2006-04-20T14:42:02Z

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Don't we have some of these platforms on the build farm.  Are they
> failing?

canary, gazelle, and osprey all pass this test just fine.  Before
accepting any patches in this area we'd better find out the difference
between the OP's netbsd system and those machines.

			regards, tom lane

  10. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2006-04-20T15:56:29Z

    Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Don't we have some of these platforms on the build farm.  Are they
> > failing?
> 
> canary, gazelle, and osprey all pass this test just fine.  Before
> accepting any patches in this area we'd better find out the difference
> between the OP's netbsd system and those machines.

Agreed.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

  11. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk> — 2006-04-20T16:34:32Z

    On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 11:56:29AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > Don't we have some of these platforms on the build farm.  Are they
> > > failing?
> > 
> > canary, gazelle, and osprey all pass this test just fine.  Before
> > accepting any patches in this area we'd better find out the difference
> > between the OP's netbsd system and those machines.
> 
> Agreed.

Quoting from my original post "NetBSD-3.99.17/i386" - so what are you
running?

.. and just to check:

patrimoine=# select '1e-400'::float;
ERROR:  "1e-400" is out of range for type double precision
patrimoine=# select version();
                                                   version                                                   
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 PostgreSQL 8.2devel on i386-unknown-netbsdelf3.99.17, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC) 3.3.3 (NetBSD nb3 20040520)
(1 row)


1e-400 wasn't rounded down to 0.



Cheers,

Patrick

  12. Re: float8 regression test failure in head

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2006-04-20T16:51:35Z

    Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk> writes:
>>> canary, gazelle, and osprey all pass this test just fine.  Before
>>> accepting any patches in this area we'd better find out the difference
>>> between the OP's netbsd system and those machines.

> Quoting from my original post "NetBSD-3.99.17/i386" - so what are you
> running?

http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_members.pl

The entries in the buildfarm list say things like "NetBSD 3.0".  Is 3.99
newer?  If so, has its underflow handling changed?

			regards, tom lane