On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 9:53 AM Cyril Champier
<cyril.champier@doctolib.com> wrote:
>
> Adrian:
>
>> Are you really looking for a pseudo-random name?
>
>
> No, the code I pasted was an existing production bug: the last_name should have been unique, so the selected patient
wouldalways be the same.
> This should have been detected in tests, but since the order was "almost always the same", our test was green 99% of
thetime, so we discarded it as flaky.
If the filter should return at most 1 row, why put a LIMIT in the
first place? Even with a forced random() you won't get a failure
every time, while asserting there's at most 1 row returned is
guaranteed to fail?