"Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> 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.
Well, such a type could be called "currency", "cash", "forex" or several
other possibilities, so I don't see any particular argument that "money"
has to be removed before something better can exist. The tightrope that
D'Arcy has to walk is different: improving "money" without making it so
incompatible as to break existing apps that use it.
> Hrm... does ANSI say anything about money types?
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: ITAGAKI Takahiro||Date: 2006-09-29 04:15:06|
|Subject: Re: Another idea for dealing with cmin/cmax|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-09-29 03:57:12|
|Subject: Re: Stored procedure array limits |