On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 12:46 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: >>> How about instead calling RAND_cleanup() after each backend fork? > >> Attached is a patch that adds RAND_cleanup() to fork_process(). > > I remain unconvinced that this is the best solution. Anybody else have > an opinion?
Do you have knowledge about systems that have /dev/random (blocking) but not /dev/urandom (non-blocking)? The only argument I see against RAND_cleanup() is that postgres might eat entropy from /dev/random (blocking) and cause both other programs and itself block, waiting for more entropy. But this can only happen on systems that don't have /dev/urandom. Note: reading from /dev/urandom does not affect /dev/random. -- marko -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
