Re: Money casting too liberal?

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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?