Re: surprising results with random()

Or perhaps:

CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW test_view AS
SELECT (random()*3)::int as test_value;

At least in this case, that should give the same result.

in this case 1/3 should be 1, 1/3 = 2 & 1/3=3

in your case 1/3 = 1, 1/2 the remainder (1/2 * 2/3 = 1/3) = 2, remaining 1/3 = 3

Although I'm guessing the original intent is to NOT generate an equal distribution, but I'm not sure what distribution is required.

Cheers,

Brent Wood

Brent Wood
DBA/GIS consultant
NIWA, Wellington
New Zealand
>>> ries van Twisk <pg(at)rvt(dot)dds(dot)nl> 02/24/09 12:13 PM >>>

Jessi,

should the function not look like this???

CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW test_view AS
SELECT
CASE
WHEN random() < .333333333 THEN '1'
WHEN random() < .5 THEN '2'
ELSE '3'
END AS test_value

FROM client;

On Feb 23, 2009, at 5:09 PM, Jessi Berkelhammer wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a view in which I want to randomly assign values if certain
> conditions hold. I was getting surprising results. Here is a (very)
> simplified version of the view, which seems to indicate the problem:
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW test_view AS
> SELECT
> CASE
> WHEN random() < .3333 THEN '1'
> WHEN random() < .3333 THEN '2'
> ELSE '3'
> END AS test_value
>
> FROM client ;
>
> It seems this should generate a random number between 0 and 1, and set
> test_value to '1' if this first generated number is less than .3333.
> Otherwise, it should generate another random number, and set
> test_value
> to '2' if this is less than .3333. And if neither of the random
> numbers
> are less than .3333, it should set test_value to '3'. It seems to me
> that there should be a relative even distribution of the 3 values.
>
> However when I run this, the values are always similar to what is
> below:
>
> X_test=> select test_value, count(*) from test_view group by 1
> order by 1;
> test_value | count
> ------------+-------
> 1 | 23947
> 2 | 16061
> 3 | 32443
>
> Why are there significantly fewer 2s? I understand that random() is
> not
> truly random, and that the seed affects this value. But it still
> confuses me that, no matter how many times I run this, there are
> always
> so few 2s. If it is generating an independent random number in the
> second call to random(), then I don't know why there are more so many
> more 1s than 2s.
>
> Thanks!
> -jessi
>
> --
> Jessi Berkelhammer
> Downtown Emergency Service Center
> Computer Programming Specialist

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

NIWA is the trading name of the National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd.