On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Yeah, I think that's probably what it is. There's PostmasterRandom() >> to initialize the random-number generator on first use, but that >> doesn't help if some other module calls random(). I wonder if we >> ought to just get rid of PostmasterRandom() and instead have the >> postmaster run that initialization code very early in startup. > > You could do arbitrary rearrangement of the postmaster's code and not > succeed in affecting this behavior in the slightest, because the > postmaster isn't running during bootstrap.
Well, if you're telling me that it's not possible to find a way to arrange things so that the random number is initialized before first use, I'm gonna respectfully disagree. If you're just critiquing my particular suggestion about where to put that code - fair enough. Maybe it really ought to live in our src/port implementation of random() or pg_lrand48(). -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
