Re: [elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-27 Thread Chun Tian (binghe)
Ian Eslick wrote: > Sorry for the delay, I'm under pressure for some other work. > > What is happening is that you aren't getting a proper value back from > the index. Can you do a (elephant::dump-btree index1) after running > the regression suite? > > Ian > Is this useful? ELE-TESTS 39 > (open-s

Re: [elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-26 Thread Ian Eslick
I'm pretty sure we have some code to work around that, but I'll check it out next time I get a chance. I think the LW problem is related to the way sorting is handled in the BDB backend. Ian On Jun 26, 2007, at 4:42 PM, Henrik Hjelte wrote: I don't know if this is related, but maybe? I re

Re: [elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-26 Thread Henrik Hjelte
I don't know if this is related, but maybe? I read something that Attila Lendvai wrote in another thread: lw's slot-value-using-class is passing in the slot name instead of the effective slot instance, this may cause problems. they should read the spec finally... :) /Henrik Hjelte __

Re: [elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-26 Thread Ian Eslick
Sorry for the delay, I'm under pressure for some other work. What is happening is that you aren't getting a proper value back from the index. Can you do a (elephant::dump-btree index1) after running the regression suite? Ian On Jun 12, 2007, at 1:13 PM, Chun Tian (binghe) wrote: Sorry,

Re: [elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-12 Thread Chun Tian (binghe)
Sorry, I was wrong. I check some code, and found these test need a non-nil *store-controller*, that's why you ask me (open-store *testbdb-spec* first. Now I can show the real reason (I think): ELE-TESTS 28 > *store-controller* NIL ELE-TESTS 29 > (open-store *testbdb-spec*) # ELE-TESTS 30 > *st

[elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-12 Thread Chun Tian (binghe)
Ian Eslick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry about that last test. A better way to do it is to set > regression-test::*catch-errors* to nil, then run the full regress > test. That will be informative. > > Thank you, > Ian Hi, Ian Can't run the full regress test when set regression-test::*cat

Re: [elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-12 Thread Ian Eslick
Sorry about that last test. A better way to do it is to set regression-test::*catch-errors* to nil, then run the full regress test. That will be informative. Thank you, Ian On Jun 12, 2007, at 12:35 PM, Chun Tian (binghe) wrote: Ian Eslick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Chun Tian, Were y

[elephant-devel] Re: Test of 0.9 on LispWorks 5.0 (64-bit) for Linux

2007-06-12 Thread Chun Tian (binghe)
Ian Eslick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Chun Tian, > > Were you able to run the tests on PostgreSQL as well? Did they show > similar failures? No. On PostgreSQL, only INDEXING-TIMING failes: (but this test is much slower than bdb) Test INDEXING-TIMING failed Form: (PROGN (MAKE-STRESS-