From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: random() function produces wrong range |
Date: | 2000-08-01 20:20:44 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.10.10008011248400.25036-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> > Actually, on my machines, both man pages for rand() and random() say
> > they return values between 0 and RAND_MAX (whether that's true or not
> > is another matter). In my case RAND_MAX==INT_MAX so the change wouldn't
> > be a problem, but it might be problematic on some of the 64 bit machines.
>
> Oh, that's interesting. What platform do you use? If RAND_MAX applies
> to random() on some machines that'd probably explain why the code is
> written like it is. But on my box (HPUX) the rand() function is old
> and crufty and considerably different from random().
That's from a pair of linux boxes, although checking on a FreeBSD box a
friend has, his boxes man pages show the range as explicitly 0 to 2^31-1
as your box does.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Smith | 2000-08-01 20:40:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: random() function produces wrong range |
Previous Message | Felipe Alvarez Harnecker | 2000-08-01 19:09:19 | SQL guru needed |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-08-01 20:27:57 | Re: Anyone care about type "filename" ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-08-01 19:49:16 | Re: pg_dump & ownership (again) |