Unix Technical Forum

SEO

vBulletin Search Engine Optimization


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > PostgreSQL > pgsql Hackers

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Andrew Dunstan
 
Posts: n/a
Default mb and ecpg regression tests


We've had ecpg regression tests being doing by the buildfarm for a
while, but they are not enabled for MSVC. Also, buildfarm has never
supported doing MBCS regression tests. In both cases the regression
tests are driven by Unix shell scripts, and in the MBCS case at least,
the script would need plenty of love before it would be suitable for the
buildfarm even on Unix.

Back when we were thinking of supporting MSVC builds, we thought that
everything would need to be a C program, and so we rewrote the main
regression script in C, for example. However, now we have a build system
for MSVC we can see that its main infrastructure is in fact perl, so I
think what we need to do is to convert the MBCS and ECPG regression
drivers to perl rather than C - which should be far, far simpler task.

I'm going to try to get these done and supported by the buildfarm by the
time we get to Beta.

cheers

andrew

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Dave Page
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> We've had ecpg regression tests being doing by the buildfarm for a
> while, but they are not enabled for MSVC. Also, buildfarm has never
> supported doing MBCS regression tests. In both cases the regression
> tests are driven by Unix shell scripts, and in the MBCS case at least,
> the script would need plenty of love before it would be suitable for the
> buildfarm even on Unix.
>
> Back when we were thinking of supporting MSVC builds, we thought that
> everything would need to be a C program, and so we rewrote the main
> regression script in C, for example. However, now we have a build system
> for MSVC we can see that its main infrastructure is in fact perl, so I
> think what we need to do is to convert the MBCS and ECPG regression
> drivers to perl rather than C - which should be far, far simpler task.
>
> I'm going to try to get these done and supported by the buildfarm by the
> time we get to Beta.


I don't think it's essential, but one of the other reasons Magnus and I
discussed for rewriting the regression tests in C was that we could
include it in the future with the installer as a platform/installation
confidence test.

Regards, Dave.


---------------------------(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

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Andrew Dunstan
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests



Dave Page wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> We've had ecpg regression tests being doing by the buildfarm for a
>> while, but they are not enabled for MSVC. Also, buildfarm has never
>> supported doing MBCS regression tests. In both cases the regression
>> tests are driven by Unix shell scripts, and in the MBCS case at least,
>> the script would need plenty of love before it would be suitable for the
>> buildfarm even on Unix.
>>
>> Back when we were thinking of supporting MSVC builds, we thought that
>> everything would need to be a C program, and so we rewrote the main
>> regression script in C, for example. However, now we have a build system
>> for MSVC we can see that its main infrastructure is in fact perl, so I
>> think what we need to do is to convert the MBCS and ECPG regression
>> drivers to perl rather than C - which should be far, far simpler task.
>>
>> I'm going to try to get these done and supported by the buildfarm by the
>> time we get to Beta.
>>

>
> I don't think it's essential, but one of the other reasons Magnus and I
> discussed for rewriting the regression tests in C was that we could
> include it in the future with the installer as a platform/installation
> confidence test.
>
>
>


That's a good point. So, do we want/need the same for MBCS and ECPG tests?

If so, we should work on creating a regression shared lib so we don't
have to replicate lots of code.

cheers

andrew

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Tom Lane
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Back when we were thinking of supporting MSVC builds, we thought that
> everything would need to be a C program, and so we rewrote the main
> regression script in C, for example. However, now we have a build system
> for MSVC we can see that its main infrastructure is in fact perl, so I
> think what we need to do is to convert the MBCS and ECPG regression
> drivers to perl rather than C - which should be far, far simpler task.


I disagree with this for ecpg because (a) it would be a capability
regression from the point of view of anyone building a non-perl-enabled
build on Unix, and (b) we already have the C regression driver, why
can't we re-use or adapt it for ecpg instead of writing and debugging
and maintaining an entirely new set of test infrastructure?

For the MBCS stuff I don't care, since no one runs that on a regular
basis anyway (or should need to...)

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Andrew Dunstan
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests



Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>
>> Back when we were thinking of supporting MSVC builds, we thought that
>> everything would need to be a C program, and so we rewrote the main
>> regression script in C, for example. However, now we have a build system
>> for MSVC we can see that its main infrastructure is in fact perl, so I
>> think what we need to do is to convert the MBCS and ECPG regression
>> drivers to perl rather than C - which should be far, far simpler task.
>>

>
> I disagree with this for ecpg because (a) it would be a capability
> regression from the point of view of anyone building a non-perl-enabled
> build on Unix, and (b) we already have the C regression driver, why
> can't we re-use or adapt it for ecpg instead of writing and debugging
> and maintaining an entirely new set of test infrastructure?
>
> For the MBCS stuff I don't care, since no one runs that on a regular
> basis anyway (or should need to...)
>
>
>


Well, you need perl to build from CVS, IIRC, but I take the point.

I don't think ECPG can use pg_regress as is, because it does more than
just run psql. We probably need to look at factoring out the common bits
into a shared lib. That's not a bad idea anyway.

cheers

andrew

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Tom Lane
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> I don't think ECPG can use pg_regress as is, because it does more than
> just run psql. We probably need to look at factoring out the common bits
> into a shared lib. That's not a bad idea anyway.


A shared library is probably overkill (it has a lot more installation
overhead than it's worth), but at least factor the source
code so we don't have two copies of the common bits.

It wouldn't be a bad goal to try to use the same "pg_regress 2.0" for
both uses, either. I'm tempted to suggest it should become a separate
subdirectory under src/bin/ to remind people it's decoupled from the
regression tests per se...

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Dave Page
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> That's a good point. So, do we want/need the same for MBCS and ECPG tests?


It would be nice for ECPG. I wasn't even aware of the MBCS stuff - if it
will exercise the unicode sorting which is a little different on Windows
iirc (due to the lack of full native UTF-8 support) it might be a useful
addition, but I wouldn't say it was worth busting a gut over.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(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

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Magnus Hagander
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> We've had ecpg regression tests being doing by the buildfarm for a
> while, but they are not enabled for MSVC. Also, buildfarm has never
> supported doing MBCS regression tests. In both cases the regression
> tests are driven by Unix shell scripts, and in the MBCS case at least,
> the script would need plenty of love before it would be suitable for the
> buildfarm even on Unix.
>
> Back when we were thinking of supporting MSVC builds, we thought that
> everything would need to be a C program, and so we rewrote the main
> regression script in C, for example. However, now we have a build system
> for MSVC we can see that its main infrastructure is in fact perl, so I
> think what we need to do is to convert the MBCS and ECPG regression
> drivers to perl rather than C - which should be far, far simpler task.
>
> I'm going to try to get these done and supported by the buildfarm by the
> time we get to Beta.


IIRC, Joachim had started working on the ecpg part. (Which is one of the
reasons I haven't looked at it myself yet)

Joachim, did you ever get anywhere with that?

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Joachim Wieland
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> IIRC, Joachim had started working on the ecpg part. (Which is one of the
> reasons I haven't looked at it myself yet)


> Joachim, did you ever get anywhere with that?


I have ecpg tests somehow running under msvc but there are still some issues.
Here are the problems that I encounter(ed):

a) ecpg uses a program for each test that runs and generates output. Those
programs need to be compiled: in MSVC we would either compile them on the
fly while testing or generate a new project for every single executable.
Since the second option is overkill, Magnus suggested to try compiling them
on the fly with the command line compiler. This is ugly but seems to work.

b) ecpg tests use several directories. This causes several problems, one of
them being the resultmap format to be changed, it currently uses:

float4/i.86-pc-mingw32=...

we might want to change the / to some other character here.

c) ecpg uses 3 different files per test. stderr, stdout and generated
source. There is not only just one file to diff against an expected file.

My approach was to have separate init and test routines for each "module"
(backend regression tests, ecpg or whatever) and share the rest.
The init routine sets up stuff and the test routine knows about the specific
test logic. It generates lists of files to diff. The diffing and reporting
is kept common of course. A problem here are alternative comparison files.
We have the resultmap entries and we have "test_n.out". This has to be
combined with ecpg having 3 files. We might want to use

test-platform.stdout instead of test.stdout and
test_1.stderr instead of test.stderr

I have not yet sorted out this last item. Proposals welcome. I hope that I
can fix it on the weekend or at least by the end of next week and then send
my version to whoever is interested.


Joachim



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2008, 08:49 AM
Magnus Hagander
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: mb and ecpg regression tests

Joachim Wieland wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> IIRC, Joachim had started working on the ecpg part. (Which is one of the
>> reasons I haven't looked at it myself yet)

>
>> Joachim, did you ever get anywhere with that?

>
> I have ecpg tests somehow running under msvc but there are still some issues.
> Here are the problems that I encounter(ed):
>
> a) ecpg uses a program for each test that runs and generates output. Those
> programs need to be compiled: in MSVC we would either compile them on the
> fly while testing or generate a new project for every single executable.
> Since the second option is overkill, Magnus suggested to try compiling them
> on the fly with the command line compiler. This is ugly but seems to work.


It might also be possible to generate a wildcard msbuild file for them,
perhaps? (If you have Visual Studio 2005, you will have msbuild) Worth
investigating, but this is probably the easiest thing to fix.


> b) ecpg tests use several directories. This causes several problems, one of
> them being the resultmap format to be changed, it currently uses:
>
> float4/i.86-pc-mingw32=...
>
> we might want to change the / to some other character here.


Hmm. I guess doable if necessary.


> c) ecpg uses 3 different files per test. stderr, stdout and generated
> source. There is not only just one file to diff against an expected file.
>
> My approach was to have separate init and test routines for each "module"
> (backend regression tests, ecpg or whatever) and share the rest.
> The init routine sets up stuff and the test routine knows about the specific
> test logic. It generates lists of files to diff. The diffing and reporting
> is kept common of course. A problem here are alternative comparison files.
> We have the resultmap entries and we have "test_n.out". This has to be
> combined with ecpg having 3 files. We might want to use
>
> test-platform.stdout instead of test.stdout and
> test_1.stderr instead of test.stderr
>
> I have not yet sorted out this last item. Proposals welcome. I hope that I
> can fix it on the weekend or at least by the end of next week and then send
> my version to whoever is interested.


Hmm. Probably easier for someone who already knows how the ecpg tests
actually work. I just keep breaking them ;-)

However - do go ahead and send what you have to -patches for comments as
a WIP patch, even if it's not ready. I'd certainly be interested at
looking at what you have so far.

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607