Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> BTW, I don't know why anyone would think that "a random number"
> would offer any advantage here. I'd use the postmaster PID, which
> is guaranteed to be unique across the space that you're worried
> about.
Well, in the post I cited, it was you who argued that the PID was a
bad choice, suggested a random number, and stated "That would have a
substantially lower collision probability than PID, if the number
generation process were well designed; and it wouldn't risk exposing
anything sensitive in the ping response."
-Kevin