Re: Two weeks to feature freeze

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>; "Dann Corbit"
<DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>; "Jason Earl" <jason(dot)earl(at)simplot(dot)com>;
"PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

> Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> >> Maybe the NIST compliance test is adequate.
>
> > Plus I belive the RedHat people are getting PostgreSQL through the NIST
> > compliance tests at the moment...I'd love to see MySQL pass them...
>
> FWIW, the first pass of those tests is complete, and it turned up
> exactly one bug that we didn't already know of (the
> outer-level-aggregate bizarrity that I fixed last week ... which MySQL
> wouldn't be subject to since they haven't got subselects ...)
>
> The work is not done, because there are some tests that couldn't be run
> because they were blocked by known noncompliances (such as lack of
> updatable views). But I'm not getting a sense that we will learn a
> whole lot from the NIST tests.
As far as I can see NIST (http://www.itl.nist.gov/div897/ctg/sql_form.htm)
tests are used *only* for testing SQL92 conformance.
Latest available test suite version 6, dated 12/1996.
Are you using about 6-7 years old test suite?
Perhaps I am wrong, I would be happy If someone could point me up-to-date
info about NIST conformance testing.

regards,
Alvis Tunkelis