On 11/14/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The other problem with using modulo is that it makes the result depend > mostly on the low-order bits of the random() result, rather than mostly > on the high-order bits; with lower-grade implementations of random(), > the lower bits are materially less random than the higher. Now > admittedly high-grade randomness is probably not too important for this > specific context, but I dislike putting in poor coding practices that > someone might see and copy without thinking...
If there's a dependency on a particular quality of random() implementation, why not just include one? Mersenne Twister is easy, while not being cryptographic strength. http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/emt.html ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq