On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 3:23 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Mark Dilger <hornschnor...@gmail.com> writes: > > I only see three invocations of ClosePipeStream in the sources. > > In two of them, the return value is checked and an error is raised > > if it failed. In the third, the error (if any) is squashed. > > > I don't know if a pipe stream over "locale -a" could ever fail to > > close, but it seems sensible to log an error if it does. > > The concrete case where that's an issue, I think, is that "locale -a" > fails, possibly after outputting a few locale names. The only report > we get about that is a failure indication from ClosePipeStream. > As things stand we just silently push on, creating no or a few collations. > With a check, we'd error out ... causing initdb to fail altogether. > > Maybe that's an overreaction; I'm not sure. Perhaps the right > thing is just to issue a warning? But ignoring it completely > seems bad.
Another option is to retry the "locale -a" call, perhaps after sleeping a short while, but I have no idea how likely a second (or third...) call to "locale -a" is to succeed if the prior call failed, mostly because I don't have a clear idea why it would fail the first time. I would prefer initdb to fail, and fail loudly, rather than warning and moving on, but I can imagine production systems which are set up in a way where that would be painful. Perhaps somebody with such a setup will respond? mark
