Thread: patch: fix TimeTest in timezones ahead of GMT
This patch fixes the TimeTest test failure I noted earlier. I believe
this failure only happens in timezones that are ahead of GMT (I am +1200
currently).
-O
Index: org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -c -r1.10 TimeTest.java
*** org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java 2 Apr 2004 07:28:57 -0000 1.10
--- org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java 13 Apr 2004 23:38:43 -0000
***************
*** 36,41 ****
--- 36,45 ----
TestUtil.closeDB(con);
}
+ private long extractMillis(long time) {
+ return (time >= 0) ? (time % 1000) : (time % 1000 + 1000);
+ }
+
/*
*
* Test use of calendar
***************
*** 78,109 ****
time = rs.getTime(1);
assertNotNull(time);
! assertEquals(100, time.getTime() % 1000);
timestamp = rs.getTimestamp(1);
assertNotNull(timestamp);
! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
! assertEquals(100, timestamp.getTime() % 1000);
! } else {
! assertEquals(100, (timestamp.getTime() + timestamp.getNanos() / 1000000) % 1000);
! }
assertEquals(100000000, timestamp.getNanos());
timetz = rs.getTime(2);
assertNotNull(timetz);
! assertEquals(10, timetz.getTime() % 1000);
timestamptz = rs.getTimestamp(2);
assertNotNull(timestamptz);
! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
! assertEquals(10, timestamptz.getTime() % 1000);
! } else {
! assertEquals(10, (timestamptz.getTime() + timestamptz.getNanos() / 1000000) % 1000);
! }
assertEquals(10000000, timestamptz.getNanos());
assertTrue(rs.next());
--- 82,113 ----
time = rs.getTime(1);
assertNotNull(time);
! assertEquals(100, extractMillis(time.getTime()));
timestamp = rs.getTimestamp(1);
assertNotNull(timestamp);
! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
! assertEquals(100, extractMillis(timestamp.getTime()));
! } else {
! assertEquals(100, extractMillis(timestamp.getTime() + timestamp.getNanos() / 1000000));
! }
assertEquals(100000000, timestamp.getNanos());
timetz = rs.getTime(2);
assertNotNull(timetz);
! assertEquals(10, extractMillis(timetz.getTime()));
timestamptz = rs.getTimestamp(2);
assertNotNull(timestamptz);
! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
! assertEquals(10, extractMillis(timestamptz.getTime()));
! } else {
! assertEquals(10, extractMillis(timestamptz.getTime() + timestamptz.getNanos() / 1000000));
! }
assertEquals(10000000, timestamptz.getNanos());
assertTrue(rs.next());
I thought kris already posted a patch for this ?
Dave
On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 19:43, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> This patch fixes the TimeTest test failure I noted earlier. I believe
> this failure only happens in timezones that are ahead of GMT (I am +1200
> currently).
>
> -O
>
>
> !DSPAM:407c7d227401462733056!
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Index: org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java,v
> retrieving revision 1.10
> diff -c -r1.10 TimeTest.java
> *** org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java 2 Apr 2004 07:28:57 -0000 1.10
> --- org/postgresql/test/jdbc2/TimeTest.java 13 Apr 2004 23:38:43 -0000
> ***************
> *** 36,41 ****
> --- 36,45 ----
> TestUtil.closeDB(con);
> }
>
> + private long extractMillis(long time) {
> + return (time >= 0) ? (time % 1000) : (time % 1000 + 1000);
> + }
> +
> /*
> *
> * Test use of calendar
> ***************
> *** 78,109 ****
>
> time = rs.getTime(1);
> assertNotNull(time);
> ! assertEquals(100, time.getTime() % 1000);
> timestamp = rs.getTimestamp(1);
> assertNotNull(timestamp);
>
> ! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
> ! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
> ! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
> ! assertEquals(100, timestamp.getTime() % 1000);
> ! } else {
> ! assertEquals(100, (timestamp.getTime() + timestamp.getNanos() / 1000000) % 1000);
> ! }
> assertEquals(100000000, timestamp.getNanos());
>
> timetz = rs.getTime(2);
> assertNotNull(timetz);
> ! assertEquals(10, timetz.getTime() % 1000);
> timestamptz = rs.getTimestamp(2);
> assertNotNull(timestamptz);
>
> ! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
> ! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
> ! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
> ! assertEquals(10, timestamptz.getTime() % 1000);
> ! } else {
> ! assertEquals(10, (timestamptz.getTime() + timestamptz.getNanos() / 1000000) % 1000);
> ! }
> assertEquals(10000000, timestamptz.getNanos());
>
> assertTrue(rs.next());
> --- 82,113 ----
>
> time = rs.getTime(1);
> assertNotNull(time);
> ! assertEquals(100, extractMillis(time.getTime()));
> timestamp = rs.getTimestamp(1);
> assertNotNull(timestamp);
>
> ! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
> ! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
> ! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
> ! assertEquals(100, extractMillis(timestamp.getTime()));
> ! } else {
> ! assertEquals(100, extractMillis(timestamp.getTime() + timestamp.getNanos() / 1000000));
> ! }
> assertEquals(100000000, timestamp.getNanos());
>
> timetz = rs.getTime(2);
> assertNotNull(timetz);
> ! assertEquals(10, extractMillis(timetz.getTime()));
> timestamptz = rs.getTimestamp(2);
> assertNotNull(timestamptz);
>
> ! // Pre 1.4 JVM's considered the nanos field completely separate
> ! // and wouldn't return it in getTime()
> ! if (TestUtil.haveMinimumJVMVersion("1.4")) {
> ! assertEquals(10, extractMillis(timestamptz.getTime()));
> ! } else {
> ! assertEquals(10, extractMillis(timestamptz.getTime() + timestamptz.getNanos() / 1000000));
> ! }
> assertEquals(10000000, timestamptz.getNanos());
>
> assertTrue(rs.next());
>
>
> !DSPAM:407c7d227401462733056!
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
>
>
> !DSPAM:407c7d227401462733056!
--
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 14675561
Dave Cramer wrote: > I thought kris already posted a patch for this ? I don't remember seeing one, and I can't find it in the archives? There was a patch applied in the same area to do with failures on JDKs before 1.4, but that didn't fix the failures I was seeing (I'm running 1.4.2). -O
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote: > This patch fixes the TimeTest test failure I noted earlier. I believe > this failure only happens in timezones that are ahead of GMT (I am +1200 > currently). > Patch applied. Kris Jurka