From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | roberts(at)panix(dot)com |
Cc: | Thomas Swan <tswan(at)olemiss(dot)edu>, Malcolm Beattie <mbeattie(at)sable(dot)ox(dot)ac(dot)uk>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [HACKERS] random() function produces wrong range |
Date: | 2000-08-03 15:45:39 |
Message-ID: | 8198.965317539@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Roland Roberts <roberts(at)panix(dot)com> writes:
> Call random() several times and test the maximum value against your
> thresholds of 2^15 and 2^31. If random() is generating values in the
> range 1:2^31-1, you would expect half of your values to be greater
> than 2^15-1; more importantly, if you generate, say, 10 values, you
> expect only a 1:1024 chance that they are all below 2^15.
Actually the odds are far better than that. If the range is 2^31-1
then only about 2^-16th of the outputs should be less than 2^15.
So ten probes gives you a failure probability of about 2^-160 not
2^-10.
Generalizing, you could tell the difference between widths of 31,
47, or 63 bits with the same level of reliability.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | luc00 | 2000-08-03 16:07:55 | OFF topic : does anybody know free hosting with PgSQL & PHP |
Previous Message | Federico Sevilla III | 2000-08-03 15:37:31 | Re: Unions in views |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-08-03 16:20:50 | bit/varbit stuff |
Previous Message | Malcolm Beattie | 2000-08-03 15:27:56 | Re: random() function produces wrong range |