On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 03:25:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> No, what he showed was correct. I'm talking about a different facet
> of the problem:
> ...
> Even if that took account of the exchange rate, it'd not be great.
> But it doesn't; it's just the same digits reinterpreted with a new
> currency sign and possibly a different number of fractional digits.
> This might be sort of tolerable if your database only ever deals in
> one currency, but even then you'd likely want to lock down what that
> currency is. Making it be controlled by a user-set GUC was probably
> not a great idea.
Yes, I get it now, thanks. Not useful, I agree.
--
Ian