On 23.01.2019 04:34, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 22.01.2019 23:10, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 22.01.2019 22:52, Branko Čibej wrote: >>> [Moving to the correct list.] >>> >>> On 22.01.2019 22:18, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> in Gentoo Linux, wc-queries-test test is failing (verified >>>> against v1.9.7-1.11.1: >>>> > [...] >>>>> svn_tests: E200006: STMT_DROP_TARGETS_LIST: Uses sqlite_master with only >>>>> 0 index component: ((null)) >>>>> DROP TABLE targets_list >>>>> svn_tests: E200042: Additional errors: >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> svn_tests: E200035: |SCAN TABLE sqlite_master >>>>> FAIL: wc-queries-test 3: test query expectations >>>>> PASS: wc-queries-test 4: test query duplicates >>>>> PASS: wc-queries-test 5: test schema statistics >>>>> PASS: wc-queries-test 6: verify queries are parsable >>>>> END: wc-queries-test >>>>> ELAPSED: wc-queries-test 0:00:00.167083 >>>> After some research we found the problem causing the test failure: >>>> >>>> In Gentoo we are building sqlite with >>>> >>>>> -DSQLITE_ENABLE_STMT_SCANSTATUS >>>> option set. If we disable that option, the test is passing. >>>> >>>> Downstream-bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/605438 >> I've filed this as issue #4804, it looks like a bug in our tests. > > I was able to reproduce this with the latest (amalgamated) SQLite on > macOS — so, not using get-deps.sh, as the version that downloads is too > old. I've written up my analysis in issue #4804; the short story is that > adding the compile-time option mentioned above adds output to 'EXPLAIN > QUERY PLAN' that our test doesn't like. > > Bert, you wrote most of this query test code; would you mind taking a > look at this issue?
I decided to "fix" this by ignoring it ... see r1852013. I think the fix is correct, given what the test is supposed to do. -- Brane
