Re: Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

Michael Paquier wrote:

> > If that's not a hard-coded PG version number then I don't know
> > what it is.  Maybe it would be better to use random() instead,
> > but surely this isn't good as-is.
> 
> We would definitely want something within the ephemeral port range, so
> we are up to that:
> rand() * 16384 + 49152;

Yes, this seems to produce the correct range.

Thanks Noah and Tom for the review, and thanks Michael for the patch.  I
pushed it.  A slight fix was to change the chomp() call; it was always
returning 1 (number of elements chomped) so it tried to kill init.

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