Re: recovery test failures on hoverfly

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> I'm a bit dubious about this. It doesn't seem more robust to insist that
> we pass undef in certain cases.

True, it'd be nicer if that didn't matter; mainly because people
will get it wrong in future.

> If passing the SQL via stdin is fragile,
> as we also found to be the case with passing it via the command line,
> perhaps we should try passing it via a tmp file. Then there would
> presumably be no SIGPIPE.

Seems kind of inefficient.  Maybe writing and reading a file would
be a negligible cost compared to everything else involved, but
I'm not sure.

Another angle is that the SIGPIPE complaints aren't necessarily
a bad thing: if psql doesn't read what we send, it's good to
know about that.  IMO the real problem is that the errors are
so darn nonrepeatable.  I wonder if there is a way to make them
more reproducible?

			regards, tom lane