Re: [PATCH] random_normal function

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

To: Paul Ramsey <pramsey@cleverelephant.ca>

Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Date: 2023-01-09T02:17:21Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Round off random_normal() test results one more decimal place.
- 02d552c4f422 16.0 landed
Remove pg_regress' never-documented "ignore" feature.
- bd8d453e9b5f 16.0 landed
Upgrade the random.sql regression test.
- 09d517773f60 16.0 landed
Invent random_normal() to provide normally-distributed random numbers.
- 38d81760c4d7 16.0 landed

Attachments

test-random-test.sql (text/plain)

I wrote:
> Also, I tried running the new random.sql regression cases over
> and over, and found that the "not all duplicates" test fails about
> one time in 100000 or so.  We could probably tolerate that given
> that the random test is marked "ignore" in parallel_schedule, but
> I thought it best to add one more iteration so we could knock the
> odds down.

Hmm ... it occurred to me to try the same check on the existing
random() tests (attached), and darn if they don't fail even more
often, usually within 50K iterations.  So maybe we should rethink
that whole thing.

			regards, tom lane