| From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source |
| Date: | 2025-10-10 07:36:43 |
| Message-ID: | 2D8C6B2A-E246-4851-93F4-EC421287E22E@yesql.se |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 10 Oct 2025, at 02:11, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 4:53 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Does it mean that we introduce something like pg_fast_random() and
>> packagers can select it as the random number generation function
>> instead of pg_strong_random()? Or can packagers select the function
>> used in pg_strong_random()?
>
> The latter -- packagers should be able to select the implementation of
> pg_strong_random(). I think pg_fast_random() is likely to be a bad
> abstraction if we don't have more use cases to guide it.
I am very much agreement with this.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2025-10-10 07:39:23 | Preserve index stats during ALTER TABLE ... TYPE ... |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2025-10-10 07:36:13 | Re: [PATCH TEST] Fix logical replication setup in subscription test `t/009_matviews.pl` |