Hi,
On 04.05.2010 18:24, Sergey E. Koposov wrote:
> ## select id ,count(*) from tmpx group by (id) having count(*)>1;
> id | count
> +---
> 0.519465064629912 | 2
> 0.0100625408813357 | 2
> 0.394671014975756 | 2
> (3 rows)
>
> and
> ## selec
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
## select id ,count(*) from tmpx group by (id) having count(*)>1;
id | count
+---
0.519465064629912 | 2
0.0100625408813357 | 2
0.394671014975756 | 2
(3 rows)
and
## select id from tmpx where id >
"Sergey E. Koposov" writes:
> On Tue, 4 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
>> They aren't; or at least you've not provided any evidence that they were.
> I think I did, since:
> ## select id ,count(*) from tmpx group by (id) having count(*)>1;
> id | count
> +---
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
"Sergey E. Koposov" writes:
So among 10^5 random numbers there are already 3 collisions. Which doesn't
seem right for the function which generate randoms of double precision
The underlying random() function only generates 31-bit integers, so
Okay, the fa
Message from mailto:m...@sai.msu.ru "Sergey E. Koposov" m...@sai.msu.ru
at 05-04-2010 06:36:23 PM --
Hello,
I'm getting strange results with PostgreSQL random() function. It would be
great if someone could either show where I am wrong or PG is wrong. Here
is what I do (PG 8.4.3, x86_
"Sergey E. Koposov" writes:
> So among 10^5 random numbers there are already 3 collisions. Which doesn't
> seem right for the function which generate randoms of double precision
The underlying random() function only generates 31-bit integers, so
collisions aren't as improbable as they might seem
Hello,
I'm getting strange results with PostgreSQL random() function. It would be
great if someone could either show where I am wrong or PG is wrong. Here
is what I do (PG 8.4.3, x86_64 platform);
I basically try to create the table with the column filled with random
numbers (either integer
