Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Michael Meskes wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:46:52PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: >>> Unfortunately I do not have access to a Vista system I could use to test >>> and track this one down. >> I'm happy to run any tests you like. > > Dave, could you please apply this small patch to pgtypeslib/datetime.c. > I still have no clue where the error code is comming from and I'm trying > to narrow it down a bit. Hi Michael, The results are attached. Please let me know if I can do anything more. Regards, Dave [NO_PID]: ECPGdebug: set to 1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGconnect: opening database regress1 on port [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 29: QUERY: create table date_test ( d date, ts timestamp) on connection regress1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 29 Ok: CREATE TABLE [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 30: QUERY: set datestyle to iso on connection regress1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 30 Ok: SET [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 35: QUERY: insert into date_test ( d , ts ) values ( date '1966-01-17' , timestamp '2000-07-12 17:34:29' ) on connection regress1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 35 Ok: INSERT 0 1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 37: QUERY: select * from date_test where d = date '1966-01-17' on connection regress1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGexecute line 37: Correctly got 1 tuples with 2 fields [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGget_data line 37: RESULT: 1966-01-17 offset: -1 array: Yes [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ECPGget_data line 37: RESULT: 1966-01-17 errno 22 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: raising sqlcode -209 in line 37, 'SQL error #-209 in line 37.'. [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: -209, state: 42804 sql error SQL error #-209 in line 37. [NO_PID]: ECPGtrans line 350 action = rollback connection = regress1 [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 [NO_PID]: ecpg_finish: Connection regress1 closed. [NO_PID]: sqlca: code: 0, state: 0 1: errno = 0 2: errno = 22 3: errno = 22 4: errno = 22 1: errno = 0 2: errno = 22 3: errno = 22 4: errno = 22 Date: 1966-01-17 timestamp: 2000-07-12 17:34:29 interval: @ 13556 days 12 hours 34 mins 14 secs m: 4, d: 19, y: 1998 date seems to get encoded to julian -622 m: 4, d: 19, y: 1998 date_day of 2003-12-04 17:34:29 is 4 Above date in format "(ddd), mmm. dd, , repeat: (ddd), mmm. dd, . end" is "(Thu), Dec. 04, 2003, repeat: (Thu), Dec. 04, 2003. end" date_defmt_asc1: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc2: 0095-12-25 date_defmt_asc3: 0095-12-25 date_defmt_asc4: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc5: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc6: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc7: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc8: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc9: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc10: 1995-12-25 date_defmt_asc12: 0095-12-25 timestamp_to_asc1: 1996-02-29 00:00:00 timestamp_to_asc2: 1994-02-11 03:10:35 timestamp_to_asc3: 2000-01-01 00:00:00 timestamp_fmt_asc: 0: abc-00:00:00-def-01/01/00-ghi% timestamp_defmt_asc(This is a 4/12/80 3-39l12test, This is a %m/%d/%y %H-%Ml%Stest) = 1980-04-12 03:39:12, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Jul 22 17:28:44 +0200 2003, %a %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 2003-07-22 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Feb 29 17:28:44 +0200 2000, %a %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 2000-02-29 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Feb 29 17:28:44 +0200 1900, %a %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 1900-02-28 15:28:44, error (should be error!): 1 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Feb 29 17:28:44 +0200 1996, %a %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 1996-02-29 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc( Jul 31 17:28:44 +0200 1996, %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 1996-07-31 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc( Jul 32 17:28:44 +0200 1996, %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 1996-07-31 15:28:44, error (should be error!): 1 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Feb 29 17:28:44 +0200 1997, %a %b %d %H:%M:%S %z %Y) = 1997-02-28 15:28:44, error (should be error!): 1 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Jul 22 17:28:44 +0200 2003, %) = 1997-02-28 15:28:44, error (should be error!): 1 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Jul 22 17:28:44 +0200 2003, a %) = 1997-02-28 15:28:44, error (should be error!): 1 timestamp_defmt_asc(Jul, 22 17_28 `44 +0200 2003 , %b, %d %H_%M`%S %z %Y) = 2003-07-22 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Jul %22 17:28:44 CEST 2003, %a %b %%%d %H:%M:%S %Z %Y) = 2003-07-22 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(Tue Jul %22 17:28:44 CEST 2003, %a %b %%%d %H:%M:%S %Z %Y) = 2003-07-22 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(abc 19 October %22 17:28:44 CEST 2003, abc%n %C %B %%%d %H:%M:%S %Z %Y) = 2003-10-22 15:28:44, error: 0 timestamp_defmt_asc(abc 18 October %34 17:28:44 CEST 80, abc%n %C %B %%%d %H:%M:%S %Z %y) = 1880-10-31 15:28:44, error (should be error!): 1 timestamp_defmt_asc(abc 18 October %34 17:2
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:46:52PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> >Unfortunately I do not have access to a Vista system I could use to test
> >and track this one down.
>
> I'm happy to run any tests you like.
Dave, could you please apply this small patch to pgtypeslib/datetime.c.
I still have no clue where the error code is comming from and I'm trying
to narrow it down a bit.
Thanks.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
--- pgtypeslib/datetime.c 2006-10-04 09:37:59.0 +0200
+++ datetime.c 2007-05-15 12:31:56.0 +0200
@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@
errno = PGTYPES_DATE_BAD_DATE;
return INT_MIN;
}
+ printf("1: errno = %d\n", errno);
if (ParseDateTime(str, lowstr, field, ftype, MAXDATEFIELDS, &nf, ptr) != 0 ||
DecodeDateTime(field, ftype, nf, &dtype, tm, &fsec, &tzp, EuroDates) != 0)
@@ -81,6 +82,7 @@
errno = PGTYPES_DATE_BAD_DATE;
return INT_MIN;
}
+ printf("2: errno = %d\n", errno);
switch (dtype)
{
@@ -95,8 +97,10 @@
errno = PGTYPES_DATE_BAD_DATE;
return INT_MIN;
}
+ printf("3: errno = %d\n", errno);
dDate = (date2j(tm->tm_year, tm->tm_mon, tm->tm_mday) - date2j(2000, 1, 1));
+ printf("4: errno = %d\n", errno);
return dDate;
}
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Dave Page wrote: > Michael Meskes wrote: >> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 11:05:39AM +0100, Dave Page wrote: P.S.: More on the other problem later. >>> OK. >> Dave, I just committed some small changes to get additional error >> logging. Hopefully this enables me to find out where exactly the error >> is coming up. If possible could you please restart a run on vista? > > Running now - I won't have access to the machine again until Monday now > though. It's passing what was the update test now which is good - thanks :-). Here's the results of the run, showing just the dt_test failure: http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=vaquita&dt=2007-05-10%2015:55:16 Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Michael Meskes wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 11:05:39AM +0100, Dave Page wrote: >>> P.S.: More on the other problem later. >> OK. > > Dave, I just committed some small changes to get additional error > logging. Hopefully this enables me to find out where exactly the error > is coming up. If possible could you please restart a run on vista? Running now - I won't have access to the machine again until Monday now though. Regards, Dave ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 11:05:39AM +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > P.S.: More on the other problem later. > > OK. Dave, I just committed some small changes to get additional error logging. Hopefully this enables me to find out where exactly the error is coming up. If possible could you please restart a run on vista? Thanks Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Michael Meskes wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:46:52PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> Oh, hang on... Vista's new 'security' features include popups that ask >> permission from the user before running any installers. One of the more >> basic checks they use is the filename - *anything* called setup.exe will >> cause user confirmation to be required before it will run. I believe for >> non-interactive sessions it'll just refuse to run. I just tried running >> update.exe myself, and yes, you guessed it, a user confirmation dialog >> popped up :-( > > Seems to be a little bit braindead to me. Yeah - according to Microsoft we should include a manifest with the executable these days that can prevent the check by specifying that administrative privileges won't be needed by the executable - but that involves us adding version resources to the exe, and generating the manifest during build which seems somewhat over the top for a quick regression test. > But anyway, I renamed it and > just committed the changes. Let's see if this works. Thanks. > P.S.: More on the other problem later. OK. Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:46:52PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: > Oh, hang on... Vista's new 'security' features include popups that ask > permission from the user before running any installers. One of the more > basic checks they use is the filename - *anything* called setup.exe will > cause user confirmation to be required before it will run. I believe for > non-interactive sessions it'll just refuse to run. I just tried running > update.exe myself, and yes, you guessed it, a user confirmation dialog > popped up :-( Seems to be a little bit braindead to me. But anyway, I renamed it and just committed the changes. Let's see if this works. Michael P.S.: More on the other problem later. -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: PostgreSQL wants to install, cancel or allow? (was Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Ned Lilly wrote: On 5/9/2007 7:46 AM Dave Page wrote: Oh, hang on... Vista's new 'security' features include popups that ask permission from the user before running any installers. One of the more basic checks they use is the filename - *anything* called setup.exe will cause user confirmation to be required before it will run. I believe for non-interactive sessions it'll just refuse to run. I just tried running update.exe myself, and yes, you guessed it, a user confirmation dialog popped up :-( You can just disable that "feature" by turning off "User Account Control" under the Windows Security Center... Yeah, I know, but that's not really a solution we can live with. Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
PostgreSQL wants to install, cancel or allow? (was Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
On 5/9/2007 7:46 AM Dave Page wrote: Oh, hang on... Vista's new 'security' features include popups that ask permission from the user before running any installers. One of the more basic checks they use is the filename - *anything* called setup.exe will cause user confirmation to be required before it will run. I believe for non-interactive sessions it'll just refuse to run. I just tried running update.exe myself, and yes, you guessed it, a user confirmation dialog popped up :-( You can just disable that "feature" by turning off "User Account Control" under the Windows Security Center... ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:40:24AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >Am Mittwoch, 9. Mai 2007 13:46 schrieb Dave Page: > > > >>Can we rename the test please? > >> > > > >I'm thinking no. Brain-dead systems should produce brain-dead test > >results. > > > > > > Not doing this would seem like sheer bloody-mindedness. We have > workarounds for craziness on many systems. Not providing for this will > mean that we have to disable the ECPG tests for Vista. I don't see how > that helps anyone. Agreed. > More seriously, we need to get the ECPG regression test rewritten in C, > as was done for the main line regression tests. Maybe we need to factor > out some of that into a library so the common code can be used in both > programs. At any rate, until this is done we can't run the ECPG tests on > MSVC builds. IIRC, Joachim has at least started work on that. (Unrelated to vista - ecpg tests are broken on both mingw and msvc for vista) //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 9. Mai 2007 13:46 schrieb Dave Page: Can we rename the test please? I'm thinking no. Brain-dead systems should produce brain-dead test results. Not doing this would seem like sheer bloody-mindedness. We have workarounds for craziness on many systems. Not providing for this will mean that we have to disable the ECPG tests for Vista. I don't see how that helps anyone. More seriously, we need to get the ECPG regression test rewritten in C, as was done for the main line regression tests. Maybe we need to factor out some of that into a library so the common code can be used in both programs. At any rate, until this is done we can't run the ECPG tests on MSVC builds. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 9. Mai 2007 13:46 schrieb Dave Page: Can we rename the test please? I'm thinking no. Brain-dead systems should produce brain-dead test results. And that helps us how exactly, on what will probably be the most widely used OS in the world within a few years? Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Am Mittwoch, 9. Mai 2007 13:46 schrieb Dave Page: > Can we rename the test please? I'm thinking no. Brain-dead systems should produce brain-dead test results. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Michael Meskes wrote: Dave, could you please run insert into date_test ( d , ts ) values ( date '1966-01-17' , timestamp '2000-07-12 17:34:29' ); on the Vista system and then select * from date_test;? According to the logs the insert runs successfully but the select gives an invalid date format. Interestingly the date argument is displayed correctly but the timestamp argument throws the invalid date error, which does not really make sense. I had to create the table manually of course, so copying what the code seems to do, I get: regress1=# create table date_test (d date, ts timestamp); CREATE TABLE regress1=# set datestyle to iso; SET regress1=# insert into date_test(d, ts) values (date '1966-01-17', timestamp '2000-07-12 17:34:29'); INSERT 0 1 regress1=# select * from date_test; d | ts +- 1966-01-17 | 2000-07-12 17:34:29 (1 row) Which looks OK to me :-( Unfortunately I do not have access to a Vista system I could use to test and track this one down. I'm happy to run any tests you like. As far as the other message is concerned I'm at a loss. It simply refuses to run the sql/update script. No idea why. Oh, hang on... Vista's new 'security' features include popups that ask permission from the user before running any installers. One of the more basic checks they use is the filename - *anything* called setup.exe will cause user confirmation to be required before it will run. I believe for non-interactive sessions it'll just refuse to run. I just tried running update.exe myself, and yes, you guessed it, a user confirmation dialog popped up :-( Can we rename the test please? Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:21:59AM +0100, Dave Page wrote: > I asked about this before, but the thread got hijacked to discuss > another buildfarm failure :-(. Currently our only Windows Vista > buildfarm member (Vaquita) fails every time (assuming it gets that far) > on ECPG's dt_test and update tests. Dave, could you please run insert into date_test ( d , ts ) values ( date '1966-01-17' , timestamp '2000-07-12 17:34:29' ); on the Vista system and then select * from date_test;? According to the logs the insert runs successfully but the select gives an invalid date format. Interestingly the date argument is displayed correctly but the timestamp argument throws the invalid date error, which does not really make sense. Unfortunately I do not have access to a Vista system I could use to test and track this one down. As far as the other message is concerned I'm at a loss. It simply refuses to run the sql/update script. No idea why. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
[HACKERS] Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita)
Hi, I asked about this before, but the thread got hijacked to discuss another buildfarm failure :-(. Currently our only Windows Vista buildfarm member (Vaquita) fails every time (assuming it gets that far) on ECPG's dt_test and update tests. I've checked the FS permissions, and see no obvious reason why the tests would fail, and I've tried running the tests manually and see them fail as well. Can someone suggest what I might try next to resolve this? I don't really have the spare time to spend figuring out ECPG at the moment. http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=vaquita&dt=2007-05-07%2020:00:05 Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
