Re: Proposal to introduce a shuffle function to intarray extension

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Martin Kalcher <martin(dot)kalcher(at)aboutsource(dot)net>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal to introduce a shuffle function to intarray extension
Date: 2022-07-17 03:32:34
Message-ID: CAKFQuwaMZHx-9NcnBTQV9ObVQfPKixcYbEEPtkJGEdjn-RcxJg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 7:25 PM Martin Kalcher <
martin(dot)kalcher(at)aboutsource(dot)net> wrote:

>
> - I added a second function sample(), because it is a lot faster to take
> some elements from an array than to shuffle the whole array and
> slice it. This function can be removed if it is not wanted. The
> important one is shuffle().
>
>
+SELECT sample('{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}', 6) !=
sample('{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}', 6);
+ ?column?
+----------
+ t
+(1 row)
+

While small, there is a non-zero chance for both samples to be equal. This
test should probably just go, I don't see what it tests that isn't covered
by other tests or even trivial usage.

Same goes for:

+SELECT shuffle('{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}') !=
shuffle('{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}');
+ ?column?
+----------
+ t
+(1 row)
+

David J.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2022-07-17 03:36:48 Re: Proposal to introduce a shuffle function to intarray extension
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-07-17 03:18:29 Re: Proposal to introduce a shuffle function to intarray extension

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2022-07-17 03:36:48 Re: Proposal to introduce a shuffle function to intarray extension
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2022-07-17 03:23:59 Re: doc: Make selectivity example match wording