From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: random() function documentation
In-reply-to: <875ynfpiru.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
References: <875ynfpiru.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
Comments: In-reply-to =?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org>
	message dated "Mon, 11 Apr 2022 19:38:45 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <432789.1649702719.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 14:45:19 -0400
Message-ID: <432790.1649702719@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/432790.1649702719%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org> writes:
> I just noticed that the since the random() rewrite¹, the documentation's
> claim² that it "uses a simple linear congruential algorithm" is no
> longer accurate (xoroshiro128** is an xorshift variant, which is a
> linear-feedback shift register algorithm).

> I don't have a suggestion for the exact wording, since I don't know
> whether xoroshiro128** qualifies as "simple", or to what level of
> specificity we want to document the algorithm.

How about we just say "uses a linear-feedback shift register algorithm"?
"Simple" is in the eye of the beholder anyway.

			regards, tom lane