From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Cc: laetitia.avrot@gmail.com
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10().
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 17:09:30 -0400
Message-ID: <37d05e7a-19f5-ef19-ab76-8dc81e95b511@2ndQuadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8795.1552590496@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <E1h3nUY-0000sM-Vf@gemulon.postgresql.org>
<20190313022159.GR13812@paquier.xyz>
<24813.1552447002@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190313050331.GT13812@paquier.xyz>
<17820.1552514192@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAEZATCX-mFwmx0NKbGsYJ6RAo8Hb=c+_CeNNXWQ7-BmK2_XVWw@mail.gmail.com>
<6989.1552538487@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<9aae40da-9572-a82b-a283-d2158ed6ab0c@2ndQuadrant.com>
<8795.1552590496@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On 3/14/19 3:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> On 3/14/19 12:41 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> So far, no other failures ...
>> I have replicated this on my Msys2 test system.
>> I assume it's a bug in the mingw math library. I think jacana is the
>> only currently reporting mingw member :-( The MSVC members appear to be
>> happy.
>> I have several releases of the mingw64 toolsets installed on jacana -
>> I'll try an earlier version to see if it makes a difference.
> Yeah, it would be interesting to know whether it's consistent across
> different mingw versions.
Tried with mingw64-gcc-5.4.0 (jacana is currently on 8.1.0). Same result.
>
> So far, though, jacana is still the only buildfarm animal that's having
> trouble with those tests as of c015f853b. I want to wait another day or
> so in hopes of getting more reports from stragglers. But assuming that
> that stays true, I do not feel any need to try to work around jacana's
> issues. We already have proof of two deficiencies in their
> hyoerbolic-function code, and considering the tiny number of test cases
> we've tried, it'd be folly to think there are only two. I don't want
> to embark on a project to clean that up for the sake of one substandard
> implementation.
>
> I feel therefore that what we should do (barring new evidence) is either
>
> 1. Remove all the inf/nan test cases for the hyoerbolic functions, on
> the grounds that they're not really worth expending buildfarm cycles on
> in the long run; or
>
> 2. Just comment out the one failing test, with a note about why.
>
> I haven't got a strong preference as to which. Thoughts?
>
>
2. would help us memorialize the problem.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Cc: andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, laetitia.avrot@gmail.com
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10().
In-Reply-To: <37d05e7a-19f5-ef19-ab76-8dc81e95b511@2ndQuadrant.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox