$\def\frm{\mathfrak{m}} \def\frp{\mathfrak{p}} \def\spec{\operatorname{Spec}}$Recall that a domain is said to be normal if it is integrally closed in its fraction field. If $A$ is an integral domain, then it is normal if and only if $A_\frp$ is normal for all primes $\frp\subset A$, 030B. Hence, if $A$ is any ring, we can define it to be normal if $A_\frp$ is a normal domain for all prime ideals $\frp\subset A$. One has:
Lemma. If $A$ is a domain, then $A$ is normal iff $A_\frm$ is normal for all maximal ideals $\frm\subset A$, 030B.
For this reason, I was wondering: is the same true for $A$ a non-domain? The key step on the linked proof requires crucially the integrity of $A$, so I don't know how would one show it for non-domains. My guess is that the result is not true, but I haven't found yet a counterexample. Here are my thoughts so far:
If $A$ is a ring such that $A_\frm$ is a (normal) domain for all $\frm\subset A$, then a closed point in $\spec A$ lies on a unique irreducible component. On the other hand, by 0357, if $A$ is a ring such that $\spec A$ has locally finitely many irreducible components and such that $A$ is Jacobson, then $A$ satisfies the lemma (locally closed points in Jacobson schemes are closed).
Hence, if $A$ is a counterexample, then $X=\spec A$ satisfies: (a) the set-theoretic intersection of two irreducible components is made out of non-closed points, (b) $X$ is either not Jacobson or doesn't have locally finitely many irreducible components.
I don't know any examples of behavior (a). On the other hand, for (b), the example of $X$ that doesn't have locally finitely many irreducible components is this, but the origin is a closed point (it is $k$-rational) and goes through infinitely many irreducible components, so this candidate affine scheme is ruled out.