| From: | ZEUGSWETTER Andreas IZ5 <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "'hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | AW: [HACKERS] 6.5 cvs: can't drop table |
| Date: | 1999-05-25 15:23:06 |
| Message-ID: | 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C60267B375@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> It bothers me that the GEQO results are not reliably reproducible
> across platforms; that complicates debugging. I have been thinking
> about suggesting that we ought to change GEQO to use a fixed random
> seed value by default, with the variable random seed being available
> only as a *non default* option. Comments anyone?
>
A few platforms (e.g. AIX) have their own random implementation, so even
with
a fixed seed they produce different randoms than others :-(
It probably still helps iff behavior is predictable on the local machine.
But: I think we use rand for some security issue. We would'nt want to make
that predictable.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-05-25 15:52:05 | Re: [HACKERS] INSERT INTO view means what exactly? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-05-25 15:10:16 | Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 cvs: can't drop table |