From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Gavan Schneider <pg-gts(at)snkmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Money casting too liberal? |
Date: | 2013-03-29 15:46:40 |
Message-ID: | 25471.1364572000@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Gavan Schneider <pg-gts(at)snkmail(dot)com> writes:
> Therefore the discussion is really about the desired role for
> the MONEY type. Should it be refined in its current dallar and
> cents mode? or, be promoted to a more universal role (akin to a
> shift from ASCII to UTF)?
Well, this has been discussed before, and the majority view every
time has been that MONEY is a legacy thing that most people would
rather rip out than sink a large amount of additional effort into.
It has some use-cases but they are narrow, and it's not clear how
much wider the use-cases would be if we tried to generalize it.
My own experience with this sort of thing leads me to think that
real applications dealing with a variety of currencies will be
needing to store additional details, such as the exact exchange
rate that applied to a particular transaction. So while merely
decoupling MONEY from lc_monetary doesn't sound like a bad thing,
it's not clear it really buys that much.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | tahoe-gary | 2013-03-29 16:07:41 | Re: OID of type by name. |
Previous Message | Gavan Schneider | 2013-03-29 15:08:14 | Re: Money casting too liberal? |