Re: consttraints.source

Hi,

I'm seeing similar problems, mainly due to failure to sort correctly
even though there is an "order by" clause.

I did a few tests and found that the sort sort seemed to fail when there
were multiple columns in the "order by" clause. (Not conclusive)

I don't know when it 1st appeared as I've been trying to compile on
SPARC-Linux for the past few attempts and this is the 1st time I've
had a fully working package to run the regression tests on!!

Thanks,
Keith.


Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
> emkxp01@mtcc.demon.co.uk
> >
> > Bruce,
> >
> > Just running the regression tests on the latest CVS on SPARC-Linux!!
> >
> > Appart from several other ordering and precision errors I'm seeing
> > errors in constraints tests due to output/constraints.source not
> > being updated for the new error messages.
>
> I have just fixed many of these WARN problems.  I am looking at the new
> results.  The first problem:
>
>     ======   boolean   ======
>     166,168d165
>     <           |f |f
>     <           |f |f
>     <           |f |f
>     170a168
>     >           |f |f
>     173a172
>     >           |f |f
>     176a176
>     >           |f |f
>
> is because the query has no ORDER BY.
>
> The second problem looks serious:
>
> QUERY: SET geqo TO 'off';
> QUERY: SELECT '' AS thirtysix, p1.f1 AS point1, p2.f1 AS point2, p1.f1<->
p2.f$
>    FROM POINT_TBL p1, POINT_TBL p2
>    ORDER BY dist, point1 using <<, point2 using <<;
> thirtysix|point1    |point2    |            dist
> ---------+----------+----------+----------------
>          |(10,10)   |(-10,0)   |22.3606797749979
>          |(0,0)     |(-10,0)   |              10
>
> The 'dist' is not being ordered.
>
> In geometry we have:
>
> 104c103
>     <       |(0,0)     |[(0,0),(6,6)]                |(-0,0)
>     ---
>     >       |(0,0)     |[(0,0),(6,6)]                |(0,0)
>
> I am happy to see the -0 changed to zero, but this may be just on my
> platform.  Also:
>
>     <           |(-0,0),(-20,-20)
>     ---
>     >           |(0,0),(-20,-20)
>     213c212
>     <           |(-0,2),(-14,0)
>     ---
>     >           |(0,2),(-14,0)
>     221c220
>     <           |(14,-0),(0,-34)
>     ---
>     >           |(14,0),(0,-34)
>     236c235
>
> We also have broken sorting in timespan:
>
> QUERY: SELECT '' AS fortyfive, r1.*, r2.*
>    FROM TIMESPAN_TBL r1, TIMESPAN_TBL r2
>    WHERE r1.f1 > r2.f1
>    ORDER BY r1.f1, r2.f1;
> fortyfive|f1                           |f1
> ---------+-----------------------------+-----------------------------
>          |@ 6 years                    |@ 14 secs ago
>          |@ 5 mons                     |@ 14 secs ago
>          |@ 5 mons 12 hours            |@ 14 secs ago
>
> How long has this been broken?  Any idea on a cause.  Obviously it is a
> sorting issue, but where?
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian maillist@candle.pha.pa.us
>