Re: pgbench internal contention

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> If you want erand48_r, best to provide that API, not kluge up some
>> other functions.

> ...because erand48() is a GNU extension with a stupid API.

I assume you mean erand48_r, there, because erand48 is pretty standard.

> I don't
> see much value in supporting that, on both counts. We're going to end
> up with the built-in erand48_r() on precisely those systems that use
> glibc, and our own everywhere else. For the 25 SLOCs it's going cost
> us, I'd rather use the same code everywhere.

Maybe. But if that's the approach we want to use, let's just call it
pg_erand48 in the code, and dispense with the alias macros as well as
all vestiges of configure support.

BTW, as far as the original plan of using random_r is concerned, how
did you manage to not run into this?
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3662
I just wasted half an hour on that stupidity in an unrelated context...

regards, tom lane