RC1?

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

I think so. The NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 issue was bothering me, but I
feel that's resolved now. (It'd be nice to hear a crosscheck from
some AIX users though...)

regards, tom lane

On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

This is Tuesday, you can only ask on Fridays :)

Vince.
--
http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com
Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

I'm waiting for jenny wang confirms the fix regarding GB18030
support. In the mean time, I'll commit the fix anyway since current
GB183030 support is so badly broken (I have checked all regression
tests have passed).
--
Tatsuo Ishii

'K, looks like we need two things confirmed ... the change that Tom made
concerning mktime(), which we need someone on AIX to test ... and the
following ...

I've been following the commit messages closely, and haven't seen anything
go in that make me edgy, so if we can get validation on those two, I think
we're good to go ...

On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

I think so. The NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 issue was bothering me, but I
feel that's resolved now. (It'd be nice to hear a crosscheck from
some AIX users though...)

abstime, tinterval and horology fail on AIX.
The rest is now working (AIX 4.3.2 xlc 5.0.0.2).

I am just now rebuilding with removing the #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970.
My feeling is, that there is no difference. Can that be ?
Attached are the regression diffs for vanilla 7.3b5

Andreas

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

abstime, tinterval and horology fail on AIX.=20

I would expect them now (without NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970) to match the
solaris-1947 comparison files for these tests. Could you confirm that?

regards, tom lane

I think so. The NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 issue was bothering me, but I
feel that's resolved now. (It'd be nice to hear a crosscheck from
some AIX users though...)

abstime, tinterval and horology fail on AIX.
The rest is now working (AIX 4.3.2 xlc 5.0.0.2).

I am just now rebuilding with removing the #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970.

Ok, when #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 is removed from aix.h, then the results
match the Solaris files.

Attached is a patch to make AIX match Solaris. Please apply and add AIX to
the supported platforms.

Thank you
Andreas

PS: what should we do with the rest of the resultmap entries for no-DST-before-1970 ?

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

Ok, when #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 is removed from aix.h, then the
results match the Solaris files.

Great!

Attached is a patch to make AIX match Solaris. Please apply and add AIX
to the supported platforms.

Patch applied to 7.3 and CVS tip --- Bruce, you're maintaining the
supported-platforms list, right?

PS: what should we do with the rest of the resultmap entries for
no-DST-before-1970 ?

I can tell you that the hppa entry is correct. I presume the cygwin
folks would've mentioned it by now if theirs wasn't.

I suspect we are looking at two different behaviors for systems with no
old DST data: either assume all before 1970 is standard time (hppa does
this) or assume that years before 1970 use the same transition rule as
1970 (I'll bet that's what Solaris, AIX, etc are doing).

regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:

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

Ok, when #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 is removed from aix.h, then the
results match the Solaris files.

Great!

Attached is a patch to make AIX match Solaris. Please apply and add AIX
to the supported platforms.

Patch applied to 7.3 and CVS tip --- Bruce, you're maintaining the
supported-platforms list, right?

AIX updated in 7.3 and CVS.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian writes:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the
supported platforms yet.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

Bruce Momjian writes:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the
supported platforms yet.

We can't just wait around indefinitely for port reports that may or may
not ever appear. In any case, most of the "<7.3" entries in the list
seem to be various flavors of *BSD; I think it's unlikely we broke
those ...

regards, tom lane

On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 16:27, Tom Lane wrote:

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

Bruce Momjian writes:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the
supported platforms yet.

We can't just wait around indefinitely for port reports that may or may
not ever appear. In any case, most of the "<7.3" entries in the list
seem to be various flavors of *BSD; I think it's unlikely we broke
those ...

Why not send an email to the folks who last reported a supported
platform and ask for an update? Probably won't get through to everyone,
but it might help pare down the list of unconfirmed.

Robert Treat

On 12 Nov 2002, Robert Treat wrote:

On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 16:27, Tom Lane wrote:

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

Bruce Momjian writes:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the
supported platforms yet.

We can't just wait around indefinitely for port reports that may or may
not ever appear. In any case, most of the "<7.3" entries in the list
seem to be various flavors of *BSD; I think it's unlikely we broke
those ...

Why not send an email to the folks who last reported a supported
platform and ask for an update? Probably won't get through to everyone,
but it might help pare down the list of unconfirmed.

I'm testing x86 solaris right now. It's turning into a giant pain because
of how the box I'm on is configured.

On 12 Nov 2002, Robert Treat wrote:

On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 16:27, Tom Lane wrote:

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

Bruce Momjian writes:

Are we ready for RC1 yet?

Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the
supported platforms yet.

We can't just wait around indefinitely for port reports that may or may
not ever appear. In any case, most of the "<7.3" entries in the list
seem to be various flavors of *BSD; I think it's unlikely we broke
those ...

Why not send an email to the folks who last reported a supported
platform and ask for an update? Probably won't get through to everyone,
but it might help pare down the list of unconfirmed.

I get this for gmake check:

(Lotsa messages deleted):

============== removing existing temp installation ==============
============== creating temporary installation ==============
============== initializing database system ==============
============== starting postmaster ==============
running on port 65432 with pid 19771
============== creating database "regression" ==============
CREATE DATABASE
ALTER DATABASE
============== dropping regression test user accounts ==============
============== installing PL/pgSQL ==============
============== running regression test queries ==============
parallel group (13 tests): float4 int8 text int2 oid int4 char boolean
varchar name float8 bit numeric boolean ... ok
char ... ok
name ... ok
varchar ... ok
text ... ok
int2 ... ok
int4 ... ok
int8 ... ok
oid ... ok
float4 ... ok
float8 ... ok
bit ... ok
numeric ... ok
============== shutting down postmaster ==============

======================
All 13 tests passed.
======================

rm regress.o
gmake[2]: Leaving directory
`/home/smarlowe/postgresql-7.3b5/src/test/regress'
gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/smarlowe/postgresql-7.3b5/src/test'

(END QUOTE)

And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the
regresssion tests?

On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes:

And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the
regresssion tests?

Somebody else just reported the same thing on Solaris. Must be
something about the pg_regress script that doesn't play nicely with
Solaris' shell. Can you poke into it and try to figure out what?
(Perhaps running the script with +x would help.)

will do.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes:

And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the
regresssion tests?

Somebody else just reported the same thing on Solaris. Must be
something about the pg_regress script that doesn't play nicely with
Solaris' shell. Can you poke into it and try to figure out what?
(Perhaps running the script with +x would help.)

OK, make -x check fails, is there some other way to use -x I'm not
thinking of here?

"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes:

And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the
regresssion tests?

Somebody else just reported the same thing on Solaris. Must be
something about the pg_regress script that doesn't play nicely with
Solaris' shell. Can you poke into it and try to figure out what?
(Perhaps running the script with +x would help.)

regards, tom lane

"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes:

OK, make -x check fails, is there some other way to use -x I'm not
thinking of here?

I was thinking of running the script by hand, not via make:

/bin/sh -x ./pg_regress --temp-install --top-builddir=../../.. --schedule=./parallel_schedule --multibyte=SQL_ASCII

regards, tom lane

On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes:

OK, make -x check fails, is there some other way to use -x I'm not
thinking of here?

I was thinking of running the script by hand, not via make:

/bin/sh -x ./pg_regress --temp-install --top-builddir=../../.. --schedule=./parallel_schedule --multibyte=SQL_ASCII

Ok, now that I've run it that way, the last couple of pages of output
look like this:

formatted=numeric
+ echo      numeric              ... \c
EXPECTED=./expected/numeric
     numeric              ... + expr abstime=abstime-solaris-1947 : 
numeric=
+ [ 0 -ne 0 ]
+ expr geometry=geometry-solaris-i386-pc : numeric=
+ [ 0 -ne 0 ]
+ expr horology=horology-solaris-1947 : numeric=
+ [ 0 -ne 0 ]
+ expr tinterval=tinterval-solaris-1947 : numeric=
+ [ 0 -ne 0 ]
bestfile=
bestdiff=
result=2
+ [ ! -r ./expected/numeric.out ]
+ diff -w ./expected/numeric.out ./results/numeric.out
result=0
+ break
+ echo ok
ok
+ read line
+ [ 0 -ne 0 ]
+ [ -n 22844 ]
+ message shutting down postmaster
_dashes===============
_spaces=
+ cut -c 1-38
+ echo shutting down postmaster
_msg=shutting down postmaster
+ echo ============== shutting down postmaster               
==============
============== shutting down postmaster               ==============
+ kill -15 22844
+ unset postmaster_pid
+ rm -f /tmp/pg_regress.19030
+ cat ./regression.out
+ grep \.\.\.
+ sed s/ //g
+ wc -l
count_total=13
+ cat ./regression.out
+ grep \.\.\. ok
+ + wc -l sed
 s/ //g
count_ok=13
+ cat ./regression.out
+ sed s/ //g
+ wc -l
+ grep \.\.\. FAILED
count_failed=0
+ cat ./regression.out
+ grep \.\.\. failed (ignored)
+ sed s/ //g
+ wc -l
count_ignored=0
+ echo

+ [ 13 -eq 13 ]
msg=All 13 tests passed.
result=0
+ sed s/./=/g
+ echo  All 13 tests passed.
dashes=======================
+ echo ======================
======================
+ echo  All 13 tests passed.
 All 13 tests passed.
+ echo ======================
======================
+ echo

+ [ -s ./regression.diffs ]
+ rm -f ./regression.diffs ./regression.out
+ exit 0
+ exit
savestatus=0
+ [ -n  ]
+ rm -f /tmp/pg_regress.19030
+ exit 0

Hope that helps.