Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> writes: >> Thanks for your thoughts, Tom. I have a couple of questions. Should we >> introduce a new seed function for the new PRNG state, used by >> array_shuffle() >> and array_sample()? What would be a good name? Or should those functions use >> pg_global_prng_state? Is it safe to assume, that pg_global_prng_state is >> seeded?
> I'd suggest to use the existing global state. The global state should be > seeded at the process start, AFAIKR. It is seeded at process start, yes. If you don't feel a need for user control over the sequence used by these functions, then using pg_global_prng_state is fine. (Basically the point to be made here is that we need to keep a tight rein on what can be affected by setseed().) regards, tom lane