| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Mahmoud Taghizadeh <m_taghi(at)yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: monetary bug |
| Date: | 2004-08-22 21:56:27 |
| Message-ID: | 1093211787.30919.5.camel@fuji.krosing.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On P, 2004-08-22 at 23:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We keep hoping someone will step up to the plate and rewrite it,
> >> instead. Per previous discussion, the type really ought to be a thin
> >> layer over "numeric", with most likely no operations of its own
> >> except I/O conversion.
>
> > And what would it do with it? Add a currency symbol? Which one? Which
> > form? Where? Format the numbers some way?
>
> The idea behind the money type is to format per the lc_monetary locale
> setting, which seems perfectly reasonable to me.
so if you put in $1.00 using en_US.UTF8 then another user using en_CA
would get 1.00CAD and I would get 1.00 EEK ?
It does make /some/ sense - I would be all for that if this is the sum I
mus pay, but object strongly if the sum must be paid *to* me ;)
--------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2004-08-22 22:36:14 | Re: monetary bug |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stěhule | 2004-08-22 21:15:13 | Add TODO, plpgsql exception, others, variables sqlcode and sqlerrm |