Обсуждение: Regression on 7.1.2 fails 17/76 - is it up to date?
This *is* supposed to be the forum for naive questions, so here goes: Are the regression tests still valid? I'm asking, because my installation reports: "17 of 76 tests failed, 1 of these failures ignored." This seems an awful lotfor a recent download..... It is a known problem, or do I need to investigate further? There is a bug report relating to PostgreSQL 7.0.3 which seems similar (http://www.ca.postgresql.org/bugs/bugs.php?4~236),but surely this is fixed by now.....? And if not: any thoughts on whetherit is the database or the regression test that is the problem? Allan. System info: RedHat Linux 7.1 on i686 SMP. bash-2.04$ uname -mrsp Linux 2.4.2-2 i686 unknown bash-2.04$ rpm -qi postgresql Name : postgresql Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 7.1.2 Vendor: (none) Release : 4PGDG Build Date: Wed 13 Jun 2001 10:18:46 PM BST Install date: Fri 29 Jun 2001 08:43:51 PM BST Build Host: lowen.wgcr.org Group : Applications/Databases Source RPM: postgresql-7.1.2-4PGDG.src.rpm Size : 4426307 License: BSD URL : http://www.postgresql.org/ Summary : PostgreSQL client programs and libraries. [...] bash-2.04$ make installcheck | grep -i fail test char ... FAILED test varchar ... FAILED test int8 ... FAILED test numeric ... FAILED test abstime ... FAILED test copy ... FAILED test select ... FAILED test select_distinct ... FAILED test select_distinct_on ... FAILED test select_implicit ... FAILED test select_having ... FAILED test aggregates ... FAILED test random ... failed (ignored) test misc ... FAILED test select_views ... FAILED test portals_p2 ... FAILED test limit ... FAILED
If this is a new install did you make sure that you install all the prerequisites?? I found a guide that the helped me through a solaris 8 install.. and trust me I would never have made it without it... Travis -----Original Message----- From: Allan Engelhardt [mailto:allane@cybaea.com] Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 5:32 PM To: pgsql-novice@postgresql.org Subject: [NOVICE] Regression on 7.1.2 fails 17/76 - is it up to date? This *is* supposed to be the forum for naive questions, so here goes: Are the regression tests still valid? I'm asking, because my installation reports: "17 of 76 tests failed, 1 of these failures ignored." This seems an awful lot for a recent download..... It is a known problem, or do I need to investigate further? There is a bug report relating to PostgreSQL 7.0.3 which seems similar (http://www.ca.postgresql.org/bugs/bugs.php?4~236), but surely this is fixed by now.....? And if not: any thoughts on whether it is the database or the regression test that is the problem? Allan. System info: RedHat Linux 7.1 on i686 SMP. bash-2.04$ uname -mrsp Linux 2.4.2-2 i686 unknown bash-2.04$ rpm -qi postgresql Name : postgresql Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 7.1.2 Vendor: (none) Release : 4PGDG Build Date: Wed 13 Jun 2001 10:18:46 PM BST Install date: Fri 29 Jun 2001 08:43:51 PM BST Build Host: lowen.wgcr.org Group : Applications/Databases Source RPM: postgresql-7.1.2-4PGDG.src.rpm Size : 4426307 License: BSD URL : http://www.postgresql.org/ Summary : PostgreSQL client programs and libraries. [...] bash-2.04$ make installcheck | grep -i fail test char ... FAILED test varchar ... FAILED test int8 ... FAILED test numeric ... FAILED test abstime ... FAILED test copy ... FAILED test select ... FAILED test select_distinct ... FAILED test select_distinct_on ... FAILED test select_implicit ... FAILED test select_having ... FAILED test aggregates ... FAILED test random ... failed (ignored) test misc ... FAILED test select_views ... FAILED test portals_p2 ... FAILED test limit ... FAILED ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Allan Engelhardt wrote: > This *is* supposed to be the forum for naive questions, so here goes: Are the regression tests still valid? > > I'm asking, because my installation reports: "17 of 76 tests failed, 1 of these failures ignored." This seems an awfullot for a recent download..... It is a known problem, or do I need to investigate further? I've run regression tests before (not this time) and seen failures. Usually, this comes from slight differences in how the various machines which can run PostGreSQL do floating point arithmetic. If the baselines for the tests is done on a Alpha based machine, and you do tests on an Intel based machine, there will be slight differences from that. Whether that causes all of the errors, I don't know. But you should be able to look through the testing and see if the answers are usually close. There are also some "obvious" things which cause differences, but off the top of my head I can't remember what these were. This is going back a version or two when I last compiled PostGreSQL for Solaris 2.5.1 on a Sparc. Just my $0.02. Gord Matter Realisations http://www.materialisations.com/ Gordon Haverland, B.Sc. M.Eng. President 101 9504 182 St. NW Edmonton, AB, CA T5T 3A7 780/481-8019 ghaverla @ freenet.edmonton.ab.ca 780/993-1274 (cell)
Allan Engelhardt <allane@cybaea.com> writes: > I'm asking, because my installation reports: "17 of 76 tests failed, 1 > of these failures ignored." This seems an awful lot for a recent > download.. Your installation seems to be *seriously* broken. Don't even consider using it till you find out what the problem is :-(. Looking at the detailed regression diffs would be a good start; also read http://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.1/postgres/regress.html As of now I believe the abstime test should be expected to show about two lines of differences, because it had an ill-considered comparison between 'current' and '30 June 2001' :-(. Otherwise you should not see any differences that you can't explain away as one of the phenomena mentioned on the aforesaid webpage. regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Allan Engelhardt <allane@cybaea.com> writes: > > I'm asking, because my installation reports: "17 of 76 tests failed, 1 > > of these failures ignored." This seems an awful lot for a recent > > download.. > > Your installation seems to be *seriously* broken. Don't even consider I've had a more careful look, and most (though not all) of my issues seem to stem from one of two problems: 1. My system seems to have an "interesting" definition of character comparisons (i.e. it says 'A' > 'a') 2. The COPY statements do not work because the path is wrong for the RPM build. My notes so far are below. Thanks for all the help so far - I guess I still need soem ideas on the collating sequence. Couldn't find anything in the manuals. Allan. CHAR 1. Fails because test=> SELECT 'A' < 'a'; ?column? ---------- f (1 row) where it expects t. test=> \encoding SQL_ASCII The only local environment variable is LANG=en_US, which I don't think will cause this problem? VARCHAR 1. This seems to be the same problem as above.... INT8 1. The regression test for int8 fails on my system because it does not expect the currency symbol in test=> select to_char(123, 'L999'); to_char --------- $ 123 (1 row) I'm not sure what the problem is. The server is started with LANG="en_US" and all other locale parameters unset (AFAICT). This is the default from the RPM startup script, so I don't know what the problem is. NUMERIC Same problem as int8 ABSTIME Fails because the date 'Jun 30, 2001' is hard-coded.... :-) COPY Fails because of invalid path: assumes /usr/lib/pgsql/test/regress/foo when path is ./regress/foo (or /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/postgresql-whatever/src/test/regress/foo) SELECT_DISTINCT_ON 1. Hmm, lots of "this will fail..." comments in the code, and it does. => XXX Further investigation. SELECT_IMPLICIT Simply an issue of the character colating sequence -- see above. SELECT_HAVING Simply an issue of the character colating sequence -- see above. AGGREGATES 1. The onek table is not populated, probably becayse of the COPY problems earlier?? => XXX Check RANDOM Random always fails because onek table is not populated; see above. MISC 1. Fails because COPY operation fals because of invalid path....see above 2. Other problems look like a feature change "the next two queries demonstrate how functions generate bogus duplicates"...? ==> XXX Check. VIEWS 1. Have to look carefully - looks the same. Length of line??? PORTALS 1. Guessing that the tenk1 and tenk2 tables are not set up correctly because of COPY problems.... => XXX Check