Re: rand48 replacement

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: rand48 replacement
Date: 2021-09-25 17:23:22
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> writes:
> Not enough. Here is a v14 which might improve things further more again.
> Sorry for this noise due to blind windows tests.

Just FTR, I strongly object to your removal of process-startup srandom()
calls. Those are not only setting the seed for our own use, but also
ensuring that things like random() calls within PL functions or other
libraries aren't 100% predictable.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Dilger 2021-09-25 18:04:29 Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2021-09-25 17:04:25 Re: rand48 replacement