From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Last call? |
Date: | 1998-10-26 01:30:15 |
Message-ID: | 6896.909365415@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> _ HPUX 10.20
You can put down an X for both HPUX 9.03 and 10.20.
I discovered a number of minor problems when I tried to compile with
HP's cc instead of gcc like I usually do. I just committed fixes for
those.
I am still getting a discrepancy in the "rules" regression test,
namely a difference in the order in which tuples are returned:
*** expected/rules.out Fri Oct 2 12:28:01 1998
--- results/rules.out Sun Oct 25 19:31:42 1998
***************
*** 315,322 ****
pname |sysname
------+-------
bm |pluto
- jwieck|orion
jwieck|notjw
(3 rows)
QUERY: delete from rtest_system where sysname = 'orion';
--- 315,322 ----
pname |sysname
------+-------
bm |pluto
jwieck|notjw
+ jwieck|orion
(3 rows)
QUERY: delete from rtest_system where sysname = 'orion';
----------------------
This happens on all four permutations of HPUX version and compiler.
Are other people really seeing the tuple order given in the "expected"
file?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas A. Szybist | 1998-10-26 02:46:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Last call? |
Previous Message | Taral | 1998-10-26 01:17:28 | RE: [HACKERS] Re: [DOCS] Last call? |