I have fixed the problem I introduced with aggregates.  They should work
now, and the HAVING regression test should work too.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Wed, 27 Jan 1999 10:52:12 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
regression test HAVING fixed
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I have fixed the problem I introduced with aggregates.  They should work
> now, and the HAVING regression test should work too.

Also, I put in Vadim's recommended fix for the subplan problem.
The regression tests look a lot better than they did.  The "union"
test is still failing by adding a bunch of

	NOTICE:  equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal

lines to the expected output.  Anybody know what's causing that?

			regards, tom lane

Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:34:18 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] regression test HAVING fixed 
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I have fixed the problem I introduced with aggregates.  They should work
> > now, and the HAVING regression test should work too.
> 
> Also, I put in Vadim's recommended fix for the subplan problem.
> The regression tests look a lot better than they did.  The "union"
> test is still failing by adding a bunch of
> 
>         NOTICE:  equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal
> 
> lines to the expected output.  Anybody know what's causing that?

Type 600 is Query node. Attempt to compare Queries?
Try gdb with break point @ equalfuncs.c:746...

Vadim

Thu, 28 Jan 1999 01:49:29 +0700
Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru>
Re: [HACKERS] regression test HAVING fixed