I cannot find traces, but I believe there was a Twitter poll on which random do people get after setseed() in postgres, and we found at least three distinct sequences across different builds.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 5:52 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > 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/3859.1545849...@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 > > > -- Darafei Praliaskouski Support me: http://patreon.com/komzpa
