Jon Buller wrote:
> 
> For some reason which I haven't figured out yet, it thinks the
> following:
> 
> template1=> select ('epoch'::datetime) as ZeroSecs;
> zerosecs                    
> ----------------------------
> Fri Dec 31 18:00:00 1999 CST
> (1 row)
> 
> template1=> select ('current'::datetime) as ZeroSecs;
> zerosecs                    
> ----------------------------
> Fri Dec 31 18:00:00 1999 CST
> (1 row)
> 
> template1=> select ('now'::datetime) as ZeroSecs;
> zerosecs                    
> ----------------------------
> Sun Sep 13 19:05:43 1998 CDT
> (1 row)

So I thought I would try it and:

template1=> select ('epoch'::datetime) as ZeroSecs;
zerosecs
--------
epoch   
(1 row)

template1=> select ('current'::datetime) as ZeroSecs;
zerosecs
--------
current 
(1 row)

template1=> select ('now'::datetime) as ZeroSecs;
zerosecs                    
----------------------------
Mon Sep 14 11:01:44 1998 BST
(1 row)

?!


Cheers,

Patrick

PS
#define DBL_MAX         1.7976931348623157E+308
#define DBL_MIN         2.2250738585072014E-308
and are OK in a program - NetBSD/i386, postgresql-current

Mon, 14 Sep 1998 11:05:41 +0100 (BST)
prlw1@cam.ac.uk (Patrick Welche)
Re: [HACKERS] Compiling 6.4 on NetBSD-current/pc532
> ?!
> PS
> #define DBL_MAX         1.7976931348623157E+308
> #define DBL_MIN         2.2250738585072014E-308
> and are OK in a program - NetBSD/i386, postgresql-current

Sure, it's the NS32532 and the math library that are the problem, not
the NetBSD or Postgres per-se. Once we are running on two dozen
processors and OSes (which we are!), new problems seen on a new
combination are likely to be pretty arcane.

Let me know how it goes, Jon. Once we have isolated the problem, we can
work around it for your machine and put the workaround into the code. If
we can get this done in the next week or two you'll have it in v6.4 when
it is released...

Really nice processor btw; too bad it got buried by the brain-dead ix86.
I'd much rather be running on a clean 400mips NS32x32...

                    - Tom

Mon, 14 Sep 1998 13:32:55 +0000
"Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] Compiling 6.4 on NetBSD-current/pc532
At 6:32 AM -0700 9/14/98, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
>> ?!
>> PS
>> #define DBL_MAX         1.7976931348623157E+308
>> #define DBL_MIN         2.2250738585072014E-308
>> and are OK in a program - NetBSD/i386, postgresql-current
>
>Sure, it's the NS32532 and the math library that are the problem, not
>the NetBSD or Postgres per-se. Once we are running on two dozen
>processors and OSes (which we are!), new problems seen on a new
>combination are likely to be pretty arcane.
>
>Let me know how it goes, Jon. Once we have isolated the problem, we can
>work around it for your machine and put the workaround into the code. If
>we can get this done in the next week or two you'll have it in v6.4 when

Well, since this is NetBSD-current we're talking about, and not a fixed
release version, I'd say the correct procedure is to fix NetBSD if that's
where the problem is.  We should still be able to get the fix in by release
date if someone does a send-pr with a real fix/patch to the NetBSD
portmaster.  A footnote in the PG release notes about needing -current
post-<some-date> for the '532 might be appropriate.

Signature failed Preliminary Design Review.
Feasibility of a new signature is currently being evaluated.
h.b.hotz@jpl.nasa.gov, or hbhotz@oxy.edu



Mon, 14 Sep 1998 08:46:24 -0700
"Henry B. Hotz" <hotz@jpl.nasa.gov>
Re: [HACKERS] Compiling 6.4 on NetBSD-current/pc532