regression test results - Linux, cvs
This is a diff of several regression tests I run on my Linux box (last cvs):
dv:~/cvs/pgsql/src/test/regress$ diff results/opr_sanity.out expected/opr_sanity.out
54,58c54,56
< oid|oprcode |oid|oprcode
< ---+-----------------+---+-----------------
< 512|on_ppath |754|pt_contained_path
< 754|pt_contained_path|512|on_ppath
< (2 rows)
---
oid|oprcode|oid|oprcode
---+-------+---+-------
(0 rows)
dv:~/cvs/pgsql/src/test/regress$ diff results/random.out expected/random.out
22,23c22
< 124
< (1 row)
---
(0 rows)
dv:~/cvs/pgsql/src/test/regress$ diff results/geometry.out expected/geometry.out
115c115
< |(-10,0) |[(-1000000,200),(300000,-40)]|(-9.99715942258202,15.3864610140472)
---
|(-10,0) |[(-1000000,200),(300000,-40)]|(-9.99715942258202,15.3864610140473)
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
This is a diff of several regression tests I run on my Linux box
(last cvs):
All known problems/features being fixed now.
The random test fails occasionally (at random, suprisingly enough :)
since I'm doing a statistical test and occasionally the result falls
outside the arbitrary limits I set. But I didn't want the limits to be
too loose otherwise we might miss truly incorrect results. If you rerun,
random is likely to pass.
- Tom
On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:38:41 +0000
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] regression test results - Linux, cvsThis is a diff of several regression tests I run on my Linux box
(last cvs):All known problems/features being fixed now.
The random test fails occasionally (at random, suprisingly enough :)
since I'm doing a statistical test and occasionally the result falls
outside the arbitrary limits I set. But I didn't want the limits to be
too loose otherwise we might miss truly incorrect results. If you rerun,
random is likely to pass.
Yes,
random test passed ok 1 from 3 tries. I have no time to test its
randomness :-)
btw, vacuum crash when postmaster starts with -B 1024 option
seems fixed now !!!! I tried many times 'vacuum analyze' and never
get problem ! Probably this is a bonus of last fixes :-)
Regards,
Oleg
- Tom
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:38:41 +0000
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] regression test results - Linux, cvsThis is a diff of several regression tests I run on my Linux box
(last cvs):All known problems/features being fixed now.
The random test fails occasionally (at random, suprisingly enough :)
since I'm doing a statistical test and occasionally the result falls
outside the arbitrary limits I set. But I didn't want the limits to be
too loose otherwise we might miss truly incorrect results. If you rerun,
random is likely to pass.Yes,
random test passed ok 1 from 3 tries. I have no time to test its
randomness :-)btw, vacuum crash when postmaster starts with -B 1024 option
seems fixed now !!!! I tried many times 'vacuum analyze' and never
get problem ! Probably this is a bonus of last fixes :-)
My guess is the catalog changes Tom did fixed it. Vacuum analyze uses
them quite a bit, and buffer cache size could affect which duplicate was
picked.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
btw, vacuum crash when postmaster starts with -B 1024 option
seems fixed now !!!! I tried many times 'vacuum analyze' and never
get problem ! Probably this is a bonus of last fixes :-)
My guess is the catalog changes Tom did fixed it. Vacuum analyze uses
them quite a bit, and buffer cache size could affect which duplicate was
picked.
Hmm, that would be an unexpected side benefit, wouldn't it! It could be
true, if vacuum depends on pg_operator entries. That'd explain why the
rest of us couldn't duplicate Oleg's problem: I'll bet no one who tried
had tables containing the data types that had bogus entries. (In fact,
I imagine you need to have some *indexes* on those data types before
you'd see such a problem in vacuum, no?)
It occurs to me that there ought to be a VACUUM ANALYZE somewhere in
the regression suite, probably at the end where it has a whole database
of weird stuff to chew on.
regards, tom lane
Import Notes
Reply to msg id not found: YourmessageofThu29Oct1998124304-0500199810291743.MAA19967@candle.pha.pa.us | Resolved by subject fallback