Horton

Re: [PATCH] random_normal function

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

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Ramsey <pramsey@cleverelephant.ca>, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2023-01-09T15:26:23Z
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 →

  1. Round off random_normal() test results one more decimal place.

  2. Remove pg_regress' never-documented "ignore" feature.

  3. Upgrade the random.sql regression test.

  4. Invent random_normal() to provide normally-distributed random numbers.

Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> So IMO all pseudorandom functions should share the same PRNG state and
> seed-setting functions. That would mean they should all be in the same
> (new) C file, so that the PRNG state can be kept private to that file.

I agree with this in principle, but I feel no need to actually reshuffle
the code before we accept a proposal for such a function that wouldn't
logically belong in float.c.

> I think it would also make sense to add a new "Random Functions"
> section to the docs, and move the descriptions of random(),
> random_normal() and setseed() there.

Likewise, this'll just add confusion in the short run.  A <sect1>
with only three functions in it is going to look mighty odd.

			regards, tom lane