New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test: try CI tests against PostgreSQL 8.2 #659

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 14, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@vlsi
Member

vlsi commented Oct 7, 2016

PostgreSQL 8.2

Tests run: 3527, Failures: 3, Errors: 170, Skipped: 1

At least, it starts & runs

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch from b0c6c24 to cc521eb Oct 7, 2016

@jorsol

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

jorsol commented Oct 7, 2016

Looks like current version don't pass on 8.2 😞.

@vlsi

This comment has been minimized.

Member

vlsi commented Oct 7, 2016

It might be just a configuration issue like trying to test "uuid" stuff on 8.2 that does not support uuid.

testGetLineseg(org.postgresql.test.jdbc4.jdbc41.GetObjectTest)  Time elapsed: 0.002 sec  <<< ERROR!
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: type "uuid" does not exist
  Position: 781
    at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2458)
    at org.postgr
@davecramer

This comment has been minimized.

Member

davecramer commented Oct 7, 2016

interesting. FYI, pg_dump supports back to 7.4

Dave Cramer

On 7 October 2016 at 12:28, Jorge Solorzano notifications@github.com
wrote:

Looks like current version don't pass on 8.2 😞.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#659 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYz9q8oJ0QXWdZfJ9wUJJDXEF9MG6a5ks5qxnMygaJpZM4KRLfe
.

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch 2 times, most recently from 1221970 to c9ef8b3 Oct 8, 2016

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the pgjdbc:master branch from b55a799 to 00a8478 Oct 8, 2016

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch 3 times, most recently from 0ed8714 to c2239c3 Oct 8, 2016

@vlsi

This comment has been minimized.

Member

vlsi commented Oct 8, 2016

Tests run: 3529, Failures: 5, Errors: 11, Skipped: 55

There's ERROR: column t.typarray does not exist from TypeInfoCache.getPGType, so I would suggest the following:

  1. add current 8.2 as "allow failures" job
  2. rebase #661 on top
  3. Make appropriate changes, so 8.2 gets supported

I'm not sure if t.typarray can be fixed with no conflicts with #661.

@jorsol

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

jorsol commented Oct 8, 2016

I feel we are back to the start, this project have very few contributors, it's worth the effort to support 8.2-8.3? Are here GPDB developers (or any other forks based on this versions) who wish to contribute with the support?

@davecramer

This comment has been minimized.

Member

davecramer commented Oct 10, 2016

Full disclosure... I work for Pivotal ;)

Dave Cramer

On 8 October 2016 at 13:28, Jorge Solorzano notifications@github.com
wrote:

I feel we are back to the start, this project have very few contributors,
it's worth the effort to support 8.2-8.3? Are here GPDB developers (or any
other forks based on this versions) who wish to contribute with the support?


You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#659 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYz9vGWf38IeLWG4XCpOBAMgqmjFjsmks5qx9KigaJpZM4KRLfe
.

@jorsol

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

jorsol commented Oct 10, 2016

jejeje, I suspected it 😉, and I'm just a community contributor who want to help with the project, but you put me in a tough position since I can work only on my spare-time.

Just for curiosity, why gpdb can't rebase the product with at least 8.4?

@davecramer

This comment has been minimized.

Member

davecramer commented Oct 10, 2016

On 9 October 2016 at 23:50, Jorge Solorzano notifications@github.com
wrote:

jejeje, I suspected it 😉, and I'm just a community contributor who want
to help with the project, but you put me in a tough position since I can
work only on my spare-time.

Just for curiosity, why gpdb can't rebase the product with at least 8.4?

We are but, we still have existing clients using the closed source code.
There are also lots of people using older versions of pg.

Please keep in mind the drivers job is to connect to postgreSQL and hide
all the complexity. That usually means the complexity is in the code.

Dave Cramer

You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#659 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYz9uB-zVe6-IkA2RdaQ5RNLAgeviJVks5qybYigaJpZM4KRLfe
.

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the pgjdbc:master branch 2 times, most recently from c8cebf6 to f52bf7f Oct 29, 2016

@jorsol

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

jorsol commented Oct 30, 2016

@vlsi any news on this?

Since t.typarray is not supported on 8.2 we should assume the current version of the driver is not fully compatible with that version and that's a bug that should be fixed.

Do you think that #661 is candidate for merge now, and work to fix t.typarray latter?

@davecramer

This comment has been minimized.

Member

davecramer commented Oct 31, 2016

@jorsol how much work to fix the t.typarray issue before merging this ?

@vlsi

This comment has been minimized.

Member

vlsi commented Oct 31, 2016

Well, it is not the only issue, so I'm inclined to testing how much errors this and #661 give together. If the set of errors is the same, then merge both, and fix 8.2 later.

Technically speaking, it would not make things worse that we have now.

@vlsi vlsi self-assigned this Nov 12, 2016

@vlsi vlsi added this to the 9.4.1213 milestone Nov 12, 2016

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch from c2239c3 to 287365a Nov 12, 2016

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch 2 times, most recently from 76baf9c to 8b7c094 Nov 13, 2016

@codecov-io

This comment has been minimized.

codecov-io commented Nov 13, 2016

Current coverage is 61.93% (diff: 100%)

Merging #659 into master will decrease coverage by 0.05%

@@             master       #659   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           150        150          
  Lines         15145      15145          
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches       3045       3045          
==========================================
- Hits           9388       9380     -8   
- Misses         4510       4514     +4   
- Partials       1247       1251     +4   

Powered by Codecov. Last update b4604cd...70199c0

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch from 8b7c094 to 2848156 Nov 13, 2016

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch from 2848156 to 27a1712 Nov 13, 2016

@vlsi vlsi force-pushed the vlsi:v82_tests branch 2 times, most recently from efd4202 to 70199c0 Nov 14, 2016

@vlsi vlsi merged commit 63ee60e into pgjdbc:master Nov 14, 2016

2 checks passed

codecov/project Absolute coverage decreased by -0.05% but relative coverage increased by +38.01% compared to b4604cd
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment