On 20.12.23 16:43, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 20.12.23 12:40, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Hm, or perhaps we should just get rid of sed use altogether. The
>> sepgsql case
>> is trivially translateable to perl, and postprocess_dtrace.sed isn't
>> much harder.
>
> Maybe yeah, but also it seems fine as is and we can easily fix the
> present issue ...
>
>> OTOH, I actually don't think it's valid to not have sed when you have
>> dtrace. Erroring out in a weird way in such an artificially
>> constructed test
>> doesn't really seem like a problem.
>
> Agreed. So let's just make it not-required, and that should work.
>
> Updated patch set attached.
I have committed these two.
