> I dunno, it seems like this is opening us to a new set of portability > hazards (ie, sub-par implementations of arc4random) with not much gain to > show for it. >
Hence I reduced to three platforms only. > > IIUC, what this code actually does is reseed itself from /dev/urandom > every so often and work from a PRNG in between. That's not a layer that > we need, because the code on top is already designed to cope with the > foibles of /dev/urandom --- or, to the extent it isn't, that's something > we have to fix anyway. So it seems like having this optionally in place > just reduces what we can assume about the randomness properties of > pg_strong_random output, which doesn't seem like a good idea. > > That I admit these are valid points. Cheers. > regards, tom lane >
