Re: rand48 replacement

Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
> Not enough. Here is a v14 which might improve things further more again. 
> Sorry for this noise due to blind windows tests.

Just FTR, I strongly object to your removal of process-startup srandom()
calls.  Those are not only setting the seed for our own use, but also
ensuring that things like random() calls within PL functions or other
libraries aren't 100% predictable.

            regards, tom lane