Re: regression failure/UnixWare7.1.1/current sources - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: regression failure/UnixWare7.1.1/current sources
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.21.0010301750260.777-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: regression failure/UnixWare7.1.1/current sources  (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Larry Rosenman writes:

> Hmm. I wonder why cc and gcc are doing different math.  Wierd. 

Not only that, but you get different results with the same compiler
depending on different optimization settings.  The joys of binary floating
point...

> I suspect it might have to do with what gcc was compiled on (7.0.x of
> UW).  Can we make 2 expected files and have the map file figure it
> out?

The resultmap mechanism isn't really prepared for this yet, but it is
doable I'd say.

> As to the timestamp, can we make a note that on timechange sundays
> don't run the regression test? :-) 

We've had a note in there since the last change (April was it?), which was
when I ran into this. :-)

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: CC not getting -O passed?
Next
From: Peter Mount
Date:
Subject: Re: Current CVS broken?