[pgrouting-dev] Versioning questions issue with PostgreSQL 9.4
Stephen Woodbridge
woodbri at swoodbridge.com
Sun Dec 21 07:55:27 PST 2014
Regina,
I did some checking:
v2.0.0 was tagged and released around Sept 24, 2013
There a surprisingly lot of changes in develop but I'm not sure that any
of them relate to the problems you are seeing.
You can ignore the utility one because that is just picking up the fact
that you changed versions.
The bdastar code is not heavily used so it is possible there is some bug
related to memory management or uninitialized variables or such that is
showing up.
I think I would still release the tagged version and open a ticket for
the intermittent bug on pg9.4 for bdastar issue.
In the develop branch, I looked through:
git checkout develop
git diff v2.0.0
Which shows all the changes since the tagged release, and there were
changes to:
pgrouting_topology.sql
kdijkstra.sql
These looked interesting but would not affect your issues.
package_pgrouting.sh
You made this change to deal with gcc 4.8 but it is not on v2.0.0.
So, I'm not sure what to think.
-Steve
On 12/20/2014 11:07 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote:
> Weird. Second time around the bdstar-any.test passed (so maybe that's some
> sort of memory issue that shows up on some runs and not others)
>
> The utilities test looks harmless (and I think I saw a note in a ticket you
> updated that to match) so I can probably ignore that one.
>
> Thanks,
> Regina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgrouting-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> [mailto:pgrouting-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Paragon
> Corporation
> Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 10:55 PM
> To: 'pgRouting developers mailing list'
> Subject: Re: [pgrouting-dev] Versioning questions issue with PostgreSQL 9.4
>
>
> Steve,
>
> Thanks for the input. I was thinking the same thing myself. Unfortunately
> I've run into a bit of a problem. The regression tests past fine againts
> develop for PostgreSQL 9.4, but I have two failures if I build against
> tagged 2.0.0
>
> Were there patches introduced to support PostgreSQL 9.4 in develop?
>
> Here are failures against PostgreSQL 9.4 64-bit (the job failed before it
> built the 32-bit version so not sure if there is an issue there as well)
>
> $stats = {
> 'doc/test/test.conf' => [
> {
> 'comment' => 'documentation SQL tests
> for any versions.',
> 'doc/test/alphashape-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/analyzeGraph-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/analyzeOneway-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/apspJohnson-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/apspWarshall-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/astar-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/bdDijkstra-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/bdstar-any.test' =>
> 'FAILED: 1,5c1
> < 0|4|3|0
> < 1|3|5|1
> < 2|6|11|1
> < 3|11|12|0
> < 4|10|-1|0
> ---
>> ERROR: Error computing path: Path Not Found',
> 'doc/test/createTopology-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/createVertTab-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/dijkstra-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/drivingDistance-any.test'
> => 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/kdijkstra-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/nodeNetwork-any.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/pointsAsPolygon-any.test'
> => 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/sampledata.test' =>
> 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/trsp-any.test' => 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/tsp-any.test' => 'Passed',
> 'doc/test/utilities-any.test' =>
> 'FAILED: 1c1
> < 2.0.0|v2.0.0
> ---
>> 2.0.0|pgrouting-2.0.0'
> }
> ],
>
>
> Thanks,
> Regina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> On 12/20/2014 12:24 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote:
>> 1) What is develop_2_0_1
>>
>> I don't recall anywhere being listed a 2.0.1 release. Or was that
>> never released.
>
> develop_2_0_1 was create to for bug fixes to the the 2.0.0 release, but I'm
> not sure that it is different from 2.0.0 (ie: there has not been anything
> done on it, but I have not diff'ed it to be sure).
>
> develop* branches are where we work on stuff before it is released.
>
>> 2) On a slightly more embarassing note, I just built the PostGIS 2.1.5
>> / pgRouting bundle package for PostgreSQL 9.4 windows 32 and 64-bit
>> and
> pushed
>> to stackbuilder already (and I forgot to specify tag 2.0.0 during
> pgRouting
>> build (since I just wanted to build for 9.4 and my tagged build job
>> builds for all versions) So I ended up with the latest develop branch
>> (which annoyingly enough says its 2.0.0 and pgrouting 2.0.0 for tag -
>>
>> select * from pgr_version();;
>> version | tag | build | hash | branch | boost
>> ---------+-----------------+-------+---------+---------+--------
>> 2.0.0 | pgrouting-2.0.0 | 78 | abde224 | develop | 1.53.0
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Vs. pgRouting (currently shipped)
>>
>> select * from pgr_version();
>> version | tag | build | hash | branch | boost
>> ---------+-----------------+-------+---------+--------+--------
>> 2.0.0 | pgrouting-2.0.0 | 0 | d6ed2cb | master | 1.53.0
>>
>> though
>>
>> I probably should have been alerted of this when I saw an extra dll:
>> librouting_vrp.dll
>
> Again the develop branch is where misc. pull requests and fixes have been
> going which will eventually become 2.1.0 release, but we have not started a
> concerted effort on developing this release yet.
>
> I think the librouting_vrp stuff is part of one or more of the GSoC projects
> that were VRP related.
>
> My biggest concern with publishing the develop branch is that it has had
> little or no effort put into it. This includes limited or no testing, no
> documentation, etc.
>
>> So my question is how do people feel about this
>>
>> A) Should I pull the release I just did and package with the tagged
>> pgRouting 2.0.0
>>
>> Or
>>
>> B) Just leave things as they are and live with the fact that
>> PostgreSQL
> 9.4
>> has a newer pgRouting. I'm more or less okay with this since PostGIS
>> 2.1.5
> /
>> pgRouting bundle will be the first for this version of PostgreSQL.
>>
>> This I guess would be fine if most of the other changes are bug fixes,
>> slight enhancements and also if no functions were removed in the dlls
>> or function api changes since pgRouting 2.0.0 was released.
>
> I think the safe thing to do it pull the package and build and push the
> released 2.0.0 package if the is possible.
>
>> My main concern here is that since some people might be doing a
>> pg_upgrade from say 9.3 to 9.4 their upgrade would fail if they had
>> pgRouting
> installed
>> in 9.3 and the 9.4 binaries don't have all the functions that were in
> 2.0.0
>> accounted for. Having more is not an issue.
>>
>>
>> Which brings me to related sub question 2:
>> If I go with B, and since I haven't built PostGIS 2.1.5/pgRouting
>> bundle
> for
>> the other PostgreSQL versions yet should I stick with the tagged
>> v2.0.0 or ship with the same that I built with 9.4?
>>
>> My gut feeling is to stick with 2.0.0 since I prefer a tagged build
>> over
> an
>> untagged one, but then again I also hate my packages being slightly
>> different.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I think we should stick with the tagged 2.0.0 packages so everyone is
> running the same stuff. I know its more work but I really think it is the
> right thing to do.
>
> Thank you for all your work on behalf of the whole pgRouting community.
> It is really appreciated.
>
> All the best Season's Greetings,
> -Steve
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Regina
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pgrouting-dev mailing list
> pgrouting-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pgrouting-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pgrouting-dev mailing list
> pgrouting-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pgrouting-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pgrouting-dev mailing list
> pgrouting-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pgrouting-dev
>
More information about the pgrouting-dev
mailing list