From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10().
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>,
 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 laetitia.avrot@gmail.com
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>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=andrew.dunstan@2ndQuadrant.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual;
 keydata=
 xsBNBE7KWFkBCAClridxur2AIc7eW2AR7izbfp3EnNefie2HbLF0izW5Ik5UjX2HBXBx4syI
 gY6b0ugohXrr274+baoAlvSbq6cAoQuEVrk5IZFzt20b1Xkx65FwGSEj526yiKLocqkJceSq
 Xr9xcA5SGY+FZv441chh5SU92v4q6z+6LPpoHOh97ptAVXZYNTtU0LevyvD5lja0TzbvJm6C
 eFXitJfnm1pLEr0DGJCR/iUOl/N62Kh4855zZC7NHIjQHPOvV5Stz/l5ilDhvGVk+xkXFPys
 SjZoUr1rXhYLpiyi5sR0X9FHXT0KnGuz1F5ERO7ZTLSSQ6fJwPj6gOk9K+vvoKvoeql5ABEB
 AAHNL0FuZHJldyBEdW5zdGFuIDxhbmRyZXcuZHVuc3RhbkAybmRRdWFkcmFudC5jb20+wsCY
 BBMBAgBCAhsDBgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUJDyV6hBYhBOQ+WEYd/Hy/RGkV
 pZn6f8tZ/DuBBQJcH/EVAhkBAAoJEJn6f8tZ/DuB7BEH/iDWZEbVft2m2MT6SPjARzTupt/l
 xLLZ/Cl6n2US2hov5+fBbnR5xvECk/YCOfG9ICvKNlpFjceqNLRKStd8cmndnI+kDw91uNM2
 hpL4aJMeW65XCHvqXlOLSwv5chBpXz9NG7FMaJ+q+59sWEWjcTNmjXgkEHn53y+1pc7nSLDe
 cr5ZI1aB3nGXRm1SoDY5PYZkUKMykW+YBZwgcs/Q5tRaE+siN7DKbz8E628+PerwAkmHPVXN
 MdJFD6gs4S0gDFA8IxcyIwZU2v4By+brzcJ9Se3FK5BYxBDHtaYZxgSrJAvOUOrLIZPQTQfL
 TtnVs3C3JTfrxCH1ceHtnA6dRuTOwE0ETspYWQEIANGc4zQULOxhbqO2dyD51YhqCNRmm9oK
 Waqf+wmW4tpDe/VVcxAnNizd4LWCHfzpb5cHAtGkOPePMfzWVf6nvdF7d3eglbtf59+zG7O7
 llV0xSSoFiieQBsrGvqDInXYX/4mRRXMtyhM353/tixC9RWLs1oofyYmCPPXXY7h9R7en3B8
 BoVrRFcdzlIY/NFNhFGW/9dkEiGjgna2Rk6e15kln4ZvFBWUg23p93w/pqXcxY6+k/8TEk+C
 4R+M6w7o2PLGOjdZ+kPiUcw5H85zf/yZJwQXzisXaNduwWB6Vads9YC9dj6kPR1c4VGRqAaY
 L++LAEOqrlvm2TvqQqZRtnEAEQEAAcLAZQQYAQIADwIbDAUCXA6fpAUJDyV6xAAKCRCZ+n/L
 Wfw7geU4B/9vFFsVmWxerDWgNjyiK80zIPmlw/iwdUlU6FIu0JWLMg4093kvxBs7RMZV9hBq
 n3ekBvD4IvFsVLJrw9qzSI2FH3UeYy5WXpEs01Ppia60NOlvRDqXbryzuvfe+iYo6bVP3Ikr
 TPTNYL/BePUTD2DPvSI82SbGTyzuA7SJv6NRqqQDMIy1fU6KyQFLmQJp/QJyhKWzm9jWh8ee
 w8jVaoMY0Kbq5N7RqisEx1Lu/Iw646UphdYzQNymf+kbiU5Kf4I6DhzV8w9sie1Bo1juNj3I
 c5/fFJsmxljbnaDbXPcnFsur1Oo9mIHFakgWgOBMuxoWfjONiLjjLh/9+ZIqSSLX
Message-ID: <37d05e7a-19f5-ef19-ab76-8dc81e95b511@2ndQuadrant.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 17:09:30 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8795.1552590496@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-MW
Precedence: bulk


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