Re: BUG #18240: Undefined behaviour in cash_mul_flt8() and friends

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:05:53AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, approximately none of cash.c pays any attention to the risks
> of overflow/underflow. Improving that situation would be a good
> finger exercise for some aspiring hacker, perhaps. Although I bet
> somebody will ask again why it is that we continue to support the
> money type.

AFAIK, we discourage the use of money in the wiki for quite a few
years:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Don%27t_Do_This#Don.27t_use_money

And numeric has much better code coverage and support. I am wondering
whether we've reached the point where it would be better to remove it
entirely from the tree, and just tell people to use numeric. This has
a cost for upgrades, where we should cross check for its use but there
is already check_for_data_type_usage() to do this job so the facility
is there.
--
Michael