"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> The seed alone wouldn't be enough to duplicate the behavior, since >> the behavior of random() typically varies across platforms. So we >> might get a report and still be unable to reproduce it. > At least the person getting the initial failure would be able to > recreate it, and possibly provide a stack trace.
On second thought, since there's no need for a particularly high-quality RNG here, we could just embed some brain-dead one-liner implementation, which should behave the same everywhere. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers