Обсуждение: FreeBSD/alpha

I have just run 7.2b4 on FreeBSD/alpha.

The float8 and geometry tests failed.

Attatched is the regression stuff.  I have submitted it to the database.

I'm not certain how significant the results are.

Especially these ones:

--- 241,249 ----
  INSERT INTO FLOAT8_TBL(f1) VALUES ('-10e400');
  ERROR:  Input '-10e400' is out of range for float8
  INSERT INTO FLOAT8_TBL(f1) VALUES ('10e-400');
+ ERROR:  Input '10e-400' is out of range for float8
  INSERT INTO FLOAT8_TBL(f1) VALUES ('-10e-400');
+ ERROR:  Input '-10e-400' is out of range for float8
  -- maintain external table consistency across platforms
  -- delete all values and reinsert well-behaved ones
  DELETE FROM FLOAT8_TBL;

Chris

"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> I have just run 7.2b4 on FreeBSD/alpha.
> The float8 and geometry tests failed.
> I'm not certain how significant the results are.

The float8 difference looks like float8-small-is-zero is not the correct
comparison file for that platform.  Looking in resultmap I see

float8/.*-freebsd=float8-small-is-zero
float8/i.86-.*-openbsd=float8-small-is-zero
float8/i.86-.*-netbsd=float8-small-is-zero

I generally think it suspicious when one of the BSD ports varies from
the other two, and here it would seem that it's wrong for freebsd to
be out of step.  I propose making the entry read

float8/i.86-.*-freebsd=float8-small-is-zero

Any comments from freebsd users out there?  Are there any other freebsd
platforms besides i86 and alpha?  If so, how do they do on this test?
        regards, tom lane

On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 10:27:08AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I generally think it suspicious when one of the BSD ports varies from
> the other two, and here it would seem that it's wrong for freebsd to
> be out of step.  I propose making the entry read
> 
> float8/i.86-.*-freebsd=float8-small-is-zero
> 
> Any comments from freebsd users out there?  Are there any other freebsd
> platforms besides i86 and alpha?  If so, how do they do on this test?

There is preliminary work on a sparc port but it is not in usable
shape as far as I am aware.

-- 
David Terrell   | "To increase the hype, I'm gonna release a bunch
Nebcorp PM      | of BLT variants (NetBLT, FreeBLT, BLT386, etc)
dbt@meat.net    | and create artificial rivalries."
wwn.nebcorp.com |  - Brian Swetland (www.openblt.org)

> I generally think it suspicious when one of the BSD ports varies from
> the other two, and here it would seem that it's wrong for freebsd to
> be out of step.  I propose making the entry read
>
> float8/i.86-.*-freebsd=float8-small-is-zero
>
> Any comments from freebsd users out there?  Are there any other freebsd
> platforms besides i86 and alpha?  If so, how do they do on this test?

FreeBSD is i386 and Alpha only ATM.  I've submitted reports for both.  Could
you please tell me where I can make the modification you suggest above to
test it?

Chris

> FreeBSD is i386 and Alpha only ATM.  I've submitted reports for
> both.  Could
> you please tell me where I can make the modification you suggest above to
> test it?

OK, I made the change myself - now only the geometry test doesn't pass.

Chris

> > > FreeBSD is i386 and Alpha only ATM...
> > OK, I made the change myself - now only the geometry test doesn't pass.
>
> Got it. Thanks for the new platform!

Got what?  The change hasn't been committed, and I'd like to correct the
geometry problem as well?

Chris

> > FreeBSD is i386 and Alpha only ATM...
> OK, I made the change myself - now only the geometry test doesn't pass.

Got it. Thanks for the new platform!
                  - Thomas

> Got what?  The change hasn't been committed, and I'd like to correct the
> geometry problem as well?

Sorry for being unclear. I've followed your reports, and even without
the patch you have demonstrated correct performance under FreeBSD/alpha.

If your patch does not get committed by someone else (and if it does not
affect other platforms) then I'll help commit it if you would like.

btw, small geometry differences are an ongoing "feature", since the
transcendental functions do not return *exactly* the same results for
all platforms. There may be an alternate geometry file which matches
exactly, or you can submit one yourself, but we need to figure out what
class of machine your results would fall into if the geometry test
results are not unique to your platform.
                      - Thomas