Call for platform testing

Have I missed any success reports? Have I left out any platforms known
to be good or bad (or which *should* be reported)? Sorry if I've missed
anything; over time there is a lot flying around for which I'm not sure
the result (AIX and QNX come to mind for examples).

QNX6 will fail in 7.2.X. We have patches for 7.3. I believe AIX is
fine thanks to work done a few weeks ago by Tatuso and others. However,
I am not totally sure.

-- 
  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, Pennsylvania 19026

QNX6 will fail in 7.2.X. We have patches for 7.3. I believe AIX is
fine thanks to work done a few weeks ago by Tatuso and others. However,
I am not totally sure.

I have been troubled by 7.2b3/AIX 5L combo. The parallel regression
test hangs in the middle of the test. It seems backend goes into an
idle state and it happens nothing after that.

I have been on a business trip till this week end. I will start to dig
into more next week.
--
Tatsuo Ishii

QNX6 will fail in 7.2.X. We have patches for 7.3. I believe AIX is
fine thanks to work done a few weeks ago by Tatuso and others.

However,

I am not totally sure.

7.2b3 passes "make check" on AIX 4.3 with both xlc and gcc.
1 Rounding difference (last digit) and 3 0 vs -0 in the geometry tests
when using gcc (both gcc and xlc show -0s, only different ones).

The PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1 macro produces an annoying warning, that I
cannot
interpret:

xlc -O2 -qmaxmem=16384 -qsrcmsg -qlonglong -DREFINT_VERBOSE -I.
-I../../src/include -I/us
r/local/include -c -o autoinc.o autoinc.c
8 | extern Pg_finfo_record * pg_finfo_autoinc (void);
Pg_finfo_record * pg_finfo_a
utoinc (void) { static Pg_finfo_record my_finfo = { 1 }; return
&my_finfo; };

........................................................................
......
........................................................................
....a
a - 1506-137 (E) Declaration must declare at least one declarator, tag,
or the members of
an enumeration.

Andreas

I've upgraded to OpenUNIX 8, and all is well.

It probably passes on UW 7 as well, but I can no longer test it.

LER

* Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org> [011127 23:06]:

I have not recorded successful tests for the following platforms (I've
included the names of folks who reported for the last release, in case
they are still able to test or want to hand it off to someone else):

AIX Gilles Darold
BeOS Cyril Velter
HPUX (have 10.20 from Tom; anyone tested 11.0 or higher?)
IRIX Robert Bruccoleri
Linux/arm Mark Knox
Linux/s390 Neale Ferguson
Linux/sparc Ryan Kirkpatrick
NetBSD/arm32 Patrick Welche
NetBSD/m68k Henry Hotz (not tested since 7.0; obsolete platform?)
NetBSD/PPC Henry Hotz
NetBSD/VAX Tom I. Helbekkmo
NetBSD/x86 Giles Lean
QNX (did I get a definitive report for 4.x already?)
SCO Unixware Larry Rosenman
Solaris/x86 Mathijs Brands
SunOS Tatsuo Ishii (old release; still relevant?)
Windows/Cygwin Jason Tishler
Windows/native Magnus Hagander (clients only)

The following platforms have been reported as successfully running
PostgreSQL 7.2:

BSD/OS Bruce
FreeBSD Chris Kings-Lynne
Linux/Alpha Tom
Linux/MIPS Hisao Shibuya
Linux/PPC Tom
Linux/x86 Thomas (and many others ;)
MacOS-X Tom
NetBSD/Alpha Thomas Thai
OpenBSD/sparc Brandon Palmer
OpenBSD/x86 Brandon Palmer
Solaris/sparc Andrew Sullivan
Tru64 Alessio Bragadini (anyone tested 5.0 or higher?)

Have I missed any success reports? Have I left out any platforms known
to be good or bad (or which *should* be reported)? Sorry if I've missed
anything; over time there is a lot flying around for which I'm not sure
the result (AIX and QNX come to mind for examples).

- Thomas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

I've upgraded to OpenUNIX 8, and all is well.
It probably passes on UW 7 as well, but I can no longer test it.

I'm not familiar with SCO products. Is OU 8 the successor to UW 7, or is
it a different product line? Do I need two entries in the list? I'm
still not clear on the differences between that and OpenServer 5 (other
than version of course) and whether that should (still) be listed as
"untested and possibly unsupported".

Hmm. Looking at Caldera's web site, it lists all three as separate
products :(

If these product lines are feature-compatible, could we just list "SCO"
as supported, and in the comments mention "tested on OpenUnix 8"?

Anyone else running other variants of SCO?

- Thomas

MacOS 10.1.1 passes.

Thanks Gavin!

- Thomas

7.2b3 passes "make check" on AIX 4.3 with both xlc and gcc.
1 Rounding difference (last digit) and 3 0 vs -0 in the geometry tests
when using gcc (both gcc and xlc show -0s, only different ones).

Thanks Andreas. Tatsuo is continuing testing on AIX 5.x, so I'll
continue to list 4.3 as supported for now.

- Thomas

"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at> writes:

The PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1 macro produces an annoying warning, that I
cannot interpret:

xlc -O2 -qmaxmem=16384 -qsrcmsg -qlonglong -DREFINT_VERBOSE -I.
-I../../src/include -I/usr/local/include -c -o autoinc.o autoinc.c
8 | extern Pg_finfo_record * pg_finfo_autoinc (void);
Pg_finfo_record * pg_finfo_a
utoinc (void) { static Pg_finfo_record my_finfo = { 1 }; return
&my_finfo; };

........................................................................
......
........................................................................
....a
a - 1506-137 (E) Declaration must declare at least one declarator, tag,
or the members of
an enumeration.

It's not so much the macro as the semicolon after it. I get "Empty
declaration" warnings from HP's cc for those lines myself. Kind of
annoying, but not writing the semicolon in the source sounds uglier.

Is it worth adding a dummy declaration to the macro just to shut up
these compilers? We could probably make the macro produce bogus
extern declarations, say PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1(foo) produces

extern Pg_finfo_record * pg_finfo_foo (void);
Pg_finfo_record * pg_finfo_foo (void)
{
static Pg_finfo_record my_finfo = { 1 };
return &my_finfo;
}
extern int pg_finfo_foo_dummy

which would satisfy even the most pedantic compiler ... unless it
chose to warn about unreferenced extern declarations, but I don't
think any do.

regards, tom lane

* Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org> [011128 08:28]:

I've upgraded to OpenUNIX 8, and all is well.
It probably passes on UW 7 as well, but I can no longer test it.

I'm not familiar with SCO products. Is OU 8 the successor to UW 7, or is
it a different product line? Do I need two entries in the list? I'm
still not clear on the differences between that and OpenServer 5 (other
than version of course) and whether that should (still) be listed as
"untested and possibly unsupported".

OU8 is UW 7 + LKP (Linux Kernel Personality) + Bug Fixes.

OSR5 is the old Sco 3.2 stuff, and is a totally different
beast/codeset.

Hmm. Looking at Caldera's web site, it lists all three as separate
products :(

If these product lines are feature-compatible, could we just list "SCO"
as supported, and in the comments mention "tested on OpenUnix 8"?

I would POSSIBLY combine OU8 and UW7, but NOT OSR5.

Anyone else running other variants of SCO?

- Thomas

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 05:01:08AM +0000, Thomas Lockhart allegedly wrote:

Solaris/x86 Mathijs Brands

Unfortunately I don't have a Solaris/x86 development box anymore :(

Cheers,

Mathijs

OU8 is UW 7 + LKP (Linux Kernel Personality) + Bug Fixes.

OK, I'll just do one entry for both UW and OU. Love those name changes
:(

OSR5 is the old Sco 3.2 stuff, and is a totally different
beast/codeset.

Maybe I'll just remove mention of it altogether. Either it is
supportable because it is Unix-y and somewhat compatible with other SCO
products, or it isn't, but it isn't worth guessing at either way unless
someone can test it.

- Thomas

Windows/Cygwin Jason Tishler

Only the "privileges" test failed when running "serial_schedule". When
running "parallel_schedule" there are random failures with errors
"cannot access some file with a table/index/...". So I think that
PostgreSQL is OK, but the Cygwin/Windows layer is not. We should try to
find what's wrong when multiple backends are running.

system:
CYGWIN_NT-5.0 CERT 1.3.5(0.47/3/2) 2001-11-13 23:16 i686 unknown

with cygipc 1.11

Dan

Regression test on Irix 6.5.13 installed with MIPSPro 7.30

=======================
2 of 79 tests failed.
=======================
geometry and join

regression test on irix 6.5.12 with MIPSpro Compilers: Version 7.3.1.2m
(this platform is 8-r10000 ip25 processors, previous is 8 -r12000 ip35 processors)

=======================
2 of 79 tests failed.
=======================
again join and geometry(it also failed in postgres 7.1.3)

7.2b3 compiles and passes all tests on Linux/Sparc64. I updated the
regression test database.

-Doug
--
Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees.
--T. J. Jackson, 1863

Luis Amigo <lamigo@atc.unican.es> writes:

again join and geometry(it also failed in postgres 7.1.3)

The join discrepancy is probably an artifact of your local qsort()
behaving slightly differently for equal keys than everyone else's.
Curious that it only affects these few queries, though.

Geometry differences in the low-order digits are par for the course.
I wouldn't even stop to think about it, except that I see that you
are already using a platform-specific geometry comparison file
(geometry-irix.out). Some digging in the CVS logs and mail archives
shows that that file was submitted by Pete Forman in Oct 2000, and
he was using

Architecture (example: Intel Pentium) : SGI MIPS 8000

Operating System (example: Linux 2.0.26 ELF) : IRIX 6.5.5m

PostgreSQL version (example: PostgreSQL-7.1): PostgreSQL-7.1

Compiler used (example: gcc 2.8.0): MIPSPro 7.3

Not clear at this point if the differences in your results are due to
hardware, library version, or compiler version differences.

regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:

Luis Amigo <lamigo@atc.unican.es> writes:

again join and geometry(it also failed in postgres 7.1.3)

The join discrepancy is probably an artifact of your local qsort()
behaving slightly differently for equal keys than everyone else's.
Curious that it only affects these few queries, though.

Geometry differences in the low-order digits are par for the course.
I wouldn't even stop to think about it, except that I see that you
are already using a platform-specific geometry comparison file
(geometry-irix.out). Some digging in the CVS logs and mail archives
shows that that file was submitted by Pete Forman in Oct 2000, and
he was using

Architecture (example: Intel Pentium) : SGI MIPS 8000

Operating System (example: Linux 2.0.26 ELF) : IRIX 6.5.5m

PostgreSQL version (example: PostgreSQL-7.1): PostgreSQL-7.1

Compiler used (example: gcc 2.8.0): MIPSPro 7.3

Not clear at this point if the differences in your results are due to
hardware, library version, or compiler version differences.

regards, tom lane

I've reviewed the results, join differences seem to be conceptual
differences, expected result gives higher value to NULL that 0
(personally I think 0 is bigger than NULL).
Geometry differences are architectural round up differences (I think
that MIPS 10000 and 12000 may have corrected previous errors or might
be a different point-of-view about rounding)

OU8 is UW 7 + LKP (Linux Kernel Personality) + Bug Fixes.

OK, I'll just do one entry for both UW and OU. Love those name changes
:(

If the first name doesn't succeed, try, try again. :-)

-- 
  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, Pennsylvania 19026

regression test on irix 6.5.12 with MIPSpro Compilers: Version 7.3.1.2m
(this platform is 8-r10000 ip25 processors, previous is 8 -r12000 ip35 processors)

=======================
2 of 79 tests failed.
=======================
again join and geometry(it also failed in postgres 7.1.3)

Got both reports. Counts as good from my pov...

Thanks!

- Thomas