Jan Wieck wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Well, our regression tests are not intended to test every possible
> > NUMERIC combination, just a resonable subset. As it is now, I often
> > think the regression tests have hung because numeric takes so much
> > longer than any of the other tests. We have had this code in there for
> > a while now, and it is not OS-specific stuff, so I think we should just
> > pair it back so we know it is working. We already have bignumeric for a
> > larger test.
>
> Bruce,
>
> have you even taken one single look at the test? It does 100
> of each add, sub, mul and div, these are the fast operations
> that don't really take much time.
>
> Then it does 10 of each sqrt(), ln(), log10(), pow10() and 10
> combined power(ln()). These are the time consuming
> operations, working iterative alas Newton, Taylor and
> McLaurin. All that is done with 10 digits after the decimal
> point only!
>
> So again, WHAT exactly do you mean with "pair it back"?
> Sorry, I don't get it. Do you want to remove the entire test?
> Reduce it to an INSERT, one SELECT (so that we know the
> input- and output functions work) and the four basic
> operators used once? Well, that's a hell of a test, makes me
> really feel comfortable. Like the mechanic kicking against
> the tire then saying "I ain't see noth'n wrong with the
> brakes, ya sure can make a trip in the mountains". Yeah, at
> least once!
Jan, regression is not a test of the level a developer would use to make
sure his code works. It is merely to make sure the install works on a
limited number of cases. Having seen zero reports of any numeric
failures since we installed it, and seeing it takes >10x times longer
than the other tests, I think it should be paired back. Do we really
need 10 tests of each complex function? I think one would do the trick.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026