On 3/22/22 20:07, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: >> On 3/22/22 18:18, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Now, if our attitude to the OAT hooks is that we are going to >>> sprinkle some at random and whether they are useful is someone >>> else's problem, then maybe these are not interesting concerns. >> So this was a pre-existing problem that the test has exposed? I don't >> think we can just say "you deal with it", and if I understand you right >> you don't think that either. > Yeah, my point exactly: the placement of those hooks needs to be rethought. > I'm guessing what we ought to do is let the cached namespace OID list > get built without interference, and then allow the OAT hook to filter > it when it's read. > >> I could make the buildfarm quiet again by resetting NO_INSTALLCHECK >> temporarily. > I was able to reproduce it under "make check" as long as I had > LANG set to one of the troublesome values, so I'm not real sure > that that'll be enough. > >
The buildfarm only runs installcheck under different locales/encodings. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
