Re: initial random incompatibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: initial random incompatibility
Date
Msg-id 20190610145154.GA2249@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to initial random incompatibility  (Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>)
Responses Re: initial random incompatibility
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Jun-08, Euler Taveira wrote:

> While fixing the breakage caused by the default number of trailing
> digits output for real and double precision, I noticed that first
> random() call after setseed(0) doesn't return the same value as 10 and
> earlier (I tested 9.4 and later). It changed an expected behavior and
> it should be listed in incompatibilities section of the release notes.
> Some applications can rely on such behavior.

Hmm.  Tom argued about the backwards-compatibility argument in
the discussion that led to that commit:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3859.1545849900@sss.pgh.pa.us
I think this is worth listing in the release notes.  Can you propose
some wording?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix testing on msys when builddir is under /c mount point
Next
From: Ibrar Ahmed
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench - extend initialization phase control