On Tuesday 29 October 2002 01:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Sorry, Ian, here is the patch I applied. You can apply this to whatever
> version you are using and test Irix with that, rather than having to
> grab CVS.
OK, I have carried out make check with the updated tests but
got FAILED on the same four tests (abstime, tinterval, horology, join).
The failures are subtly different (see here for new regression diff):
http://home.akademie.de/~IBarwick/IRIX_65_1.regression.diffs
Having looked at them again I see the following:
- in horology the timestamp tests seem to have succeeded (presumably the previous failures were triggered by the change
towinter time);
- the tests which are still failing in abstime, tinterval and horology all refer to dates before 1970, where AFAICS
theyare all out by one hour; possibly this explanation?:
"Some systems using older time zone libraries fail to apply daylight-saving
corrections to dates before 1970, causing pre-1970 PDT times to be displayed
in PST instead. This will result in localized differences in the test
results."
(cf. http://www.postgresql.org/idocs/index.php?regress-evaluation.html );
- the join tests are failing slightly differently; I would suggest that this is because the ORDER BY is still not
explicitenough, and for what ever reason under IRIX the undefined result row orderings are in a different order to
everyother platform...
e.g. with this statement:
SELECT '' AS "xxx", J1_TBL.i, j, t, k FROM J1_TBL LEFT OUTER JOIN J2_TBL USING (i) ORDER BY i;
xxx | i | j | t | k
-----+---+---+-------+---- | 0 | | zero | | 1 | 4 | one | -1 | 2 | 3 | two | 2 | 2 | 3 | two |
4 | 3 | 2 | three | -3 | 4 | 1 | four | | 5 | 0 | five | -5 | 5 | 0 | five | -5 | 6 | 6 | six |
| 7 | 7 | seven | | 8 | 8 | eight | | | 0 | zero | | | | null |
(13 rows)
the order of the last two rows is not defined. The expected order according to the regression tests is:
| | | null | | | 0 | zero |
Ian Barwick
barwick@gmx.net