Third call for platform testing

On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 03:17:06PM +0000, Thomas Lockhart allegedly wrote:

And here are the up-to-date platforms; thanks for the reports:

<SNIP>

Solaris 2.7 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier

Marc, was this done without unix sockets?

Mathijs
--
It's not that perl programmers are idiots, it's that the language
rewards idiotic behavior in a way that no other language or tool has
ever done.
Erik Naggum

On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Mathijs Brands wrote:

On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 03:17:06PM +0000, Thomas Lockhart allegedly wrote:

And here are the up-to-date platforms; thanks for the reports:

<SNIP>

Solaris 2.7 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier

Marc, was this done without unix sockets?

nope, purely default ... it was only the x86 platform that I had a bugger
with getting a clean regress working on ...

I still don't see an entry for Linux 2.4.x

Cheers.

Thomas Lockhart wrote:

I still don't see an entry for Linux 2.4.x

My (uncommitted) updates to the real list show 2.4.2 in the comments
section. I may remove all mention of versions, since it seems that most
released versions of x86 Linux run PostgreSQL successfully.

Comments?

- Thomas

On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 12:02:35PM +1200, Franck Martin allegedly wrote:

I still don't see an entry for Linux 2.4.x

Cheers.

This should fix that:

======================
All 76 tests passed.
======================

rm regress.o
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/exp/tmp/postgresql-7.1RC1/src/test/regress'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/exp/tmp/postgresql-7.1RC1/src/test'
pc11j:/usr/exp/tmp/postgresql-7.1RC1$ uname -a
Linux pc11j 2.4.2 #8 Fri Mar 2 16:40:13 CET 2001 i686 unknown

Mathijs
--
It's not that perl programmers are idiots, it's that the language
rewards idiotic behavior in a way that no other language or tool has
ever done.
Erik Naggum

I just built and tested RC1 on Linux 2.4.2, with glibc-2.2.2 and
gcc-2.95.2 on a Debian 2.2+ x86 system. ("+" implying some packages
from "unstable".)

I configured it --with-perl --with-openssl --with-CXX.
It built without errors, but with a few warnings.

This one seemed (portably) odd:
----------
In file included from gram.y:43:
lex.plpgsql_yy.c: In function `plpgsql_yylex':
lex.plpgsql_yy.c:972: warning: label `find_rule' defined but not used
----------

And this:
----------
ar crs libpq.a `lorder fe-auth.o fe-connect.o fe-exec.o fe-misc.o fe-print.o fe-lobj.o pqexpbuffer.o dllist.o pqsignal.o | tsort`
tsort: -: input contains a loop:

tsort: dllist.o
----------

And this:
----------
ar crs libecpg.a `lorder execute.o typename.o descriptor.o data.o error.o prepare.o memory.o connect.o misc.o | tsort`
tsort: -: input contains a loop:

tsort: connect.o
tsort: execute.o
tsort: data.o
----------

And this:

----------
ar crs libplpgsql.a `lorder pl_parse.o pl_handler.o pl_comp.o pl_exec.o pl_funcs.o | tsort`
tsort: -: input contains a loop:

tsort: pl_comp.o
tsort: pl_parse.o
----------

I ran "make check". It said:

----------
All 76 tests passed.
----------

Nathan Myers
ncm@zembu.com

Unreported or problem platforms:

Linux 2.0.x MIPS 7.0 2000-04-13 (Tatsuo has lost machine)
mklinux PPC750 7.0 2000-04-13, Tatsuo Ishii
NetBSD m68k 7.0 2000-04-10 (Henry has lost machine)
NetBSD Sparc 7.0 2000-04-13, Tom I. Helbekkmo
QNX 4.25 x86 7.0 2000-04-01, Dr. Andreas Kardos
Ultrix MIPS 7.1 2001-??-??, Alexander Klimov

mklinux has failed Tatsuo's testing afaicr. Demote to unsupported?

Yes. But you'd better to change mklinux -> MkLinux DR1. There may be
a chance that latest MkLinux or gcc successfully runs 7.1...

mklinux has failed Tatsuo's testing afaicr. Demote to unsupported?

Yes. But you'd better to change mklinux -> MkLinux DR1. There may be
a chance that latest MkLinux or gcc successfully runs 7.1...

OK. So we are close to a final tally of supported machines. The
"unsupported machines" are listed at the end, and those include QNX and
Ultrix, which both may end up supported in the very near future. I've
left NetBSD/m68k and NetBSD/Sparc on the supported list since we have no
reason to think that they *won't* work for 7.1, but they may get bumped
to unsupported if we do not have maintainers with access to working
machines. That will be especially problematic for the m68k-based
machines, since they are no longer in (large scale) production.

I may not have correct info for SCO OpenServer. Can someone verify that
7.1 works on this platform? With the UDK compiler set, it *should* be
identical wrt support to UnixWare with the same compiler set, right? If
we don't get testing done, I'll revert the description to that for 7.0,
but leave it as a supported platform.

Since Windows (not NT) is supported on the client side only, should I
move it to "unsupported"? I think I will, but leave the comments that
clients have been tested.

If the scorecard does not change, we are on 29 distinct platforms, the
largest number we have *ever* been qualified on. And simultaneously for
all on the day of release, which is simply not done in the closed source
world.

Thanks to everyone for the great support on porting and testing!

- Thomas

Here are the up-to-date platforms:

AIX 4.3.3 RS6000 7.1 2001-03-21, Gilles Darold
BeOS 5.0.4 x86 7.1 2000-12-18, Cyril Velter
BSDI 4.01 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Bruce Momjian
Compaq Tru64 4.0g Alpha 7.1 2001-03-19, Brent Verner
FreeBSD 4.3 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Vince Vielhaber
HPUX PA-RISC 7.1 2001-03-19, 10.20 Tom Lane, 11.00 Giles Lean
IRIX 6.5.11 MIPS 7.1 2001-03-22, Robert Bruccoleri
Linux 2.2.x Alpha 7.1 2001-01-23, Ryan Kirkpatrick
Linux 2.2.x armv4l 7.1 2001-03-22, Mark Knox
Linux 2.0.x MIPS 7.1 2001-03-30, Dominic Eidson
Linux 2.2.18 PPC74xx 7.1 2001-03-19, Tom Lane
Linux 2.2.x S/390 7.1 2000-11-17, Neale Ferguson
Linux 2.2.15 Sparc 7.1 2001-01-30, Ryan Kirkpatrick
Linux 2.2.16 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Thomas Lockhart
MacOS X Darwin PPC 7.1 2000-12-11, Peter Bierman
NetBSD 1.5 Alpha 7.1 2001-03-22, Giles Lean
NetBSD 1.5E arm32 7.1 2001-03-21, Patrick Welche
NetBSD m68k 7.0 2000-04-10 (Henry has lost machine)
NetBSD Sparc 7.0 2000-04-13, Tom I. Helbekkmo
NetBSD VAX 7.1 2001-03-30, Tom I. Helbekkmo
NetBSD 1.5 x86 7.1 2001-03-23, Giles Lean
OpenBSD 2.8 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-23, Brandon Palmer
OpenBSD 2.8 x86 7.1 2001-03-22, Brandon Palmer
SCO OpenServer 5 x86 7.1 2001-03-13, Billy Allie
SCO UnixWare 7.1.1 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Larry Rosenman
Solaris 2.7-8 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier
Solaris x86 7.1 2001-03-27, Mathijs Brands
SunOS 4.1.4 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-23, Tatsuo Ishii
WinNT/Cygwin x86 7.1 2001-03-16, Jason Tishler

And the "unsupported platforms":

DGUX m88k
MkLinux DR1 PPC750 7.0 2000-04-13, Tatsuo Ishii
NextStep x86
QNX 4.25 x86 7.0 2000-04-01, Dr. Andreas Kardos
System V R4 m88k
System V R4 MIPS
Ultrix MIPS 7.1 2001-03-26, Alexander Klimov
Windows/Win32 x86 7.1 2001-03-26, Magnus Hagander (clients only)

On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

[Snip]

Linux 2.0.x MIPS 7.1 2001-03-30, Dominic Eidson

I just ran the "make check" (paralell regression tests) - instead of the
"make installcheck" that I'd run previously...

[nobody@web-cache regress]$ grep 'FAILED' regression.out
test geometry ... FAILED
test horology ... FAILED

The relevant diff for horology seem to be:

[nobody@web-cache regress]$ diff -c ./expected/horology.out ./results/horology.out 
*** ./expected/horology.out     Sun Dec  3 08:51:11 2000
--- ./results/horology.out      Tue Apr  3 11:38:27 2001
***************
*** 122,128 ****
  SELECT time with time zone '01:30' + interval '02:01' AS "03:31:00-08";
   03:31:00-08 
  -------------
!  03:31:00-08
  (1 row)

  SELECT time with time zone '01:30-08' - interval '02:01' AS "23:29:00-08";
--- 122,128 ----
  SELECT time with time zone '01:30' + interval '02:01' AS "03:31:00-08";
   03:31:00-08 
  -------------
!  03:31:00-07
  (1 row)

SELECT time with time zone '01:30-08' - interval '02:01' AS "23:29:00-08";
***************
*** 140,146 ****
SELECT time with time zone '03:30' + interval '1 month 04:01' AS "07:31:00-08";
07:31:00-08
-------------
! 07:31:00-08
(1 row)

  SELECT interval '04:30' - time with time zone '01:02' AS "+03:28";
--- 140,146 ----
  SELECT time with time zone '03:30' + interval '1 month 04:01' AS "07:31:00-08";
   07:31:00-08 
  -------------
!  07:31:00-07
  (1 row)

SELECT interval '04:30' - time with time zone '01:02' AS "+03:28";

Seems there's a couple of off-by-one errors on this platform (according to
Marc, the same was the case for the geometry stuff...)

--
Dominic J. Eidson
"Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.the-infinite.org/ http://www.the-infinite.org/~dominic/

I just ran the "make check" (paralell regression tests) - instead of the
"make installcheck" that I'd run previously...

[nobody@web-cache regress]$ grep 'FAILED' regression.out
test geometry ... FAILED
test horology ... FAILED

The relevant diff for horology seem to be:

I can't speak to the geo test failures, but the horology failures have to
do with the change from daylight saving change. Since we lost an hour
they will be off. Is this something to be looked at? The failure of the
test is to be expected, but it will cause some to worry when their
regression tests fail.

Thoughts?

- Brandon

b. palmer, bpalmer@crimelabs.net
pgp: www.crimelabs.net/bpalmer.pgp5

Hi all...

I just installed 7.1RC1 on an sun enterprise 250 runnning debian 2.2r2
linux and everything went ok..

I compiled with --enable-local and --with-java among other but it seems
that the ja created doesn't like international characters. I use the
postgresql.jar found in /usr/local/postgresql/share/java/. When running
using this one i get ? instead of for example �,� or �. Changing to
jdbc7.0-1.2.jar from an rpminstall (mandrake 7.2) made everything work
just fine.

Did I do something wrong or miss something?

Thanks in advance!

Fredrik

Thoughts?

Besides "Thomas is an idiot"? :)

Not sure how to test the "implicit time zone" feature of "TIME WITH TIME
ZONE" without risking the same kinds of trouble. Maybe the test should
be recast to using only comparisons with other date/time types which
have been shown to behave themselves across time zone boundaries. But
I'm not sure that this would continue to really test the feature.

- Thomas

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:

Not sure how to test the "implicit time zone" feature of "TIME WITH TIME
ZONE" without risking the same kinds of trouble. Maybe the test should
be recast to using only comparisons with other date/time types which
have been shown to behave themselves across time zone boundaries. But
I'm not sure that this would continue to really test the feature.

I suspect we have no choice but to eliminate this particular test from
the regression suite. A test that fails for a few days around DST
boundaries is one thing, but a test that fails for six months out of the
year is another.

BTW, the reason HPUX was failing to fail is that its mktime() is picky
about tm_year; we were forgetting to subtract off 1900 in that
particular code path. Fixed. Now I get a failure like everyone else ;-)

regards, tom lane

On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 03:31:25PM +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

OK. So we are close to a final tally of supported machines.
...
Here are the up-to-date platforms:

AIX 4.3.3 RS6000 7.1 2001-03-21, Gilles Darold
BeOS 5.0.4 x86 7.1 2000-12-18, Cyril Velter
BSDI 4.01 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Bruce Momjian
Compaq Tru64 4.0g Alpha 7.1 2001-03-19, Brent Verner
FreeBSD 4.3 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Vince Vielhaber
HPUX PA-RISC 7.1 2001-03-19, 10.20 Tom Lane, 11.00 Giles Lean
IRIX 6.5.11 MIPS 7.1 2001-03-22, Robert Bruccoleri
Linux 2.2.x Alpha 7.1 2001-01-23, Ryan Kirkpatrick
Linux 2.2.x armv4l 7.1 2001-03-22, Mark Knox
Linux 2.0.x MIPS 7.1 2001-03-30, Dominic Eidson
Linux 2.2.18 PPC74xx 7.1 2001-03-19, Tom Lane
Linux 2.2.x S/390 7.1 2000-11-17, Neale Ferguson
Linux 2.2.15 Sparc 7.1 2001-01-30, Ryan Kirkpatrick
Linux 2.2.16 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Thomas Lockhart
MacOS X Darwin PPC 7.1 2000-12-11, Peter Bierman
NetBSD 1.5 Alpha 7.1 2001-03-22, Giles Lean
NetBSD 1.5E arm32 7.1 2001-03-21, Patrick Welche
NetBSD m68k 7.0 2000-04-10 (Henry has lost machine)
NetBSD Sparc 7.0 2000-04-13, Tom I. Helbekkmo
NetBSD VAX 7.1 2001-03-30, Tom I. Helbekkmo
NetBSD 1.5 x86 7.1 2001-03-23, Giles Lean
OpenBSD 2.8 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-23, Brandon Palmer
OpenBSD 2.8 x86 7.1 2001-03-22, Brandon Palmer
SCO OpenServer 5 x86 7.1 2001-03-13, Billy Allie
SCO UnixWare 7.1.1 x86 7.1 2001-03-19, Larry Rosenman
Solaris 2.7-8 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier
Solaris x86 7.1 2001-03-27, Mathijs Brands
SunOS 4.1.4 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-23, Tatsuo Ishii
WinNT/Cygwin x86 7.1 2001-03-16, Jason Tishler

And the "unsupported platforms":

DGUX m88k
MkLinux DR1 PPC750 7.0 2000-04-13, Tatsuo Ishii
NextStep x86
QNX 4.25 x86 7.0 2000-04-01, Dr. Andreas Kardos
System V R4 m88k
System V R4 MIPS
Ultrix MIPS 7.1 2001-03-26, Alexander Klimov
Windows/Win32 x86 7.1 2001-03-26, Magnus Hagander (clients only)

I saw three separate reports of successful builds on Linux 2.4.2 on x86
(including mine), but it isn't listed here.

--
Nathan Myers
ncm@zembu.com

On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:10:12 -0700, Nathan Myers alluded:

I saw three separate reports of successful builds on Linux 2.4.2 on x86
(including mine), but it isn't listed here.

[jeff@cairhien pronto]$ /var/postgresql/bin/psql -V
psql (PostgreSQL) 7.1RC1
contains history support
..

[jeff@cairhien pronto]$ uname -a
Linux cairhien 2.4.3 #1 Tue Apr 3 01:08:19 EDT 2001 i686 unknown

Jeff

--
Jeff Duffy
jeff@alanne.com

I saw three separate reports of successful builds on Linux 2.4.2 on x86
(including mine), but it isn't listed here.

It is listed in the comments in the real docs. At least one report was
for an extensively patched 2.4.2, and I'm not sure of the true lineage
of the others.

I *could* remove the version info from the x86 listing, and mention both
2.2.x and 2.4.x in the comments.

- Thomas

On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 11:19:04PM +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

I saw three separate reports of successful builds on Linux 2.4.2 on x86
(including mine), but it isn't listed here.

It is listed in the comments in the real docs. At least one report was
for an extensively patched 2.4.2, and I'm not sure of the true lineage
of the others.

You could ask. Just to ignore reports that you have asked for is not
polite. My report was based on a virgin, unpatched 2.4.2 kernel, and
(as noted) the Debian-packaged glibc-2.2.2.

If you are trying to trim your list, would be reasonable to drop
Linux-2.0.x, because that version is not being maintained any more.

I *could* remove the version info from the x86 listing, and mention both
2.2.x and 2.4.x in the comments.

Linux-2.2 and Linux-2.4 are different codebases. It is worth noting,
besides, the glibc-version tested along with each Linux kernel version.

Nathan Myers
ncm@zembu.com

Compaq Tru64 4.0g Alpha 7.1 2001-03-19, Brent Verner

We ran these regression tests with both native cc and gcc -- worth
mentioning that both work.

Adriaan

Here are the up-to-date platforms:

AIX 4.3.3 RS6000 7.1 2001-03-21, Gilles Darold
BeOS 5.0.4 x86 7.1 2000-12-18, Cyril Velter

I just checked RC2 on BeOS and everything is OK except the Horlogy test
(regarding previous discussions, it seems to be normal ?)

cyril

select version();
version
--------------------------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL 7.1RC2 on i586-pc-beos, compiled by GCC 2.9-beos-991026
(1 row)

$ more regression.diffs
*** ./expected/horology.out     Sun Dec  3 15:51:11 2000
--- ./results/horology.out      Wed Apr  4 09:24:27 2001
***************
*** 122,128 ****
  SELECT time with time zone '01:30' + interval '02:01' AS "03:31:00-08";
   03:31:00-08
  -------------
!  03:31:00-08
  (1 row)

  SELECT time with time zone '01:30-08' - interval '02:01' AS "23:29:00-08";
--- 122,128 ----
  SELECT time with time zone '01:30' + interval '02:01' AS "03:31:00-08";
   03:31:00-08
  -------------
!  03:31:00-07
  (1 row)

SELECT time with time zone '01:30-08' - interval '02:01' AS "23:29:00-08";
***************
*** 140,146 ****
SELECT time with time zone '03:30' + interval '1 month 04:01' AS "07:31:00-
08";
07:31:00-08
-------------
! 07:31:00-08
(1 row)

  SELECT interval '04:30' - time with time zone '01:02' AS "+03:28";
--- 140,146 ----
  SELECT time with time zone '03:30' + interval '1 month 04:01' AS "07:31:00-
08";
   07:31:00-08
  -------------
!  07:31:00-07
  (1 row)

SELECT interval '04:30' - time with time zone '01:02' AS "+03:28";

======================================================================

Solaris 2.7-8 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier

I've reported Solaris 2.6 Sparc as working on a post-RC1 snapshot.
--
Pete Forman -./\.- Disclaimer: This post is originated
WesternGeco -./\.- by myself and does not represent
pete.forman@westerngeco.com -./\.- opinion of Schlumberger, Baker
http://www.crosswinds.net/~petef -./\.- Hughes or their divisions.

On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Nathan Myers wrote:

On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 11:19:04PM +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

I saw three separate reports of successful builds on Linux 2.4.2 on x86
(including mine), but it isn't listed here.

It is listed in the comments in the real docs. At least one report was
for an extensively patched 2.4.2, and I'm not sure of the true lineage
of the others.

You could ask. Just to ignore reports that you have asked for is not
polite. My report was based on a virgin, unpatched 2.4.2 kernel, and
(as noted) the Debian-packaged glibc-2.2.2.

I just looked at the regression test database and didn't see any report
from you. Did you not submit it?

http://www.postgresql.org/~vev/regress/

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

You could ask. Just to ignore reports that you have asked for is not
polite. My report was based on a virgin, unpatched 2.4.2 kernel, and
(as noted) the Debian-packaged glibc-2.2.2.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of Linux boxes are not yet
running 2.4 kernels, so imho it is not a big issue. I've mentioned 2.4
as well as 2.2 kernels in the (very short) tabular summary, so any
interested user would know that both will work for them. 2.0.x kernels
work as well, so I may just drop version info from the first field in
the summary altogether.

You can inspect the current info in the developer's docs, posted on the
web site.

The Right Place for more extensive information might be FAQ_Linux, which
was last updated three years ago. Would someone have time to go through
that and scrub the info?

- Thomas

On Wednesday 04 April 2001 13:29, Pete Forman wrote:

Solaris 2.7-8 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier

I've reported Solaris 2.6 Sparc as working on a post-RC1 snapshot.

Same for Solaris 8 Sparc, but only tested with RC1.

--
El mejor sistema operativo es aquel que te da de comer.
Cuida tu dieta.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Marques | mmarques@unl.edu.ar
Programador, Administrador | Centro de Telematica
Universidad Nacional
del Litoral
-----------------------------------------------------------------