Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: New version of money type

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>,Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com,sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New version of money type
Date: 2006-09-29 03:53:29
Message-ID: 20060929035328.GA90915@nasby.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:23:30PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:19:47PM -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> >> Well, it is already included.  The current proposal is simply to
> >> improve the existing type.  I guess you are arguing a different
> >> proposal altogether - to remove the existing type.
>  
> > The existing type is depricated and has been since at least 8.1; so yes,
> > it's slated for removal.
> 
> Well, my perception of that has always been "it needs to be upgraded or
> removed".  So if D'Arcy wants to work on the improvement angle, I have
> no problem with him doing so.  The thing we need to negotiate is "how
> much improvement is needed to keep it in core".

I think it's also important to protect for the possibility of a more
complete (and probably incompatible) type in the future, such as one
that stores what currency a value is in.

Hrm... does ANSI say anything about money types?
-- 
Jim Nasby                                            jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-09-29 03:57:12
Subject: Re: Stored procedure array limits
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-09-29 03:36:18
Subject: Re: JAVA Support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group