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 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
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)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-29 03:57:12 | Re: Stored procedure array limits |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-29 03:36:18 | Re: JAVA Support |