From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18240: Undefined behaviour in cash_mul_flt8() and friends |
Date: | 2023-12-12 12:01:38 |
Message-ID: | CAApHDvrBLa=gQ0tCg8727RaZXWDg1sDvFJ2+-DVy5SC=NSSKkg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 22:03, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> 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.
We could extract it into a contrib module.
That might help reduce new usages of it and would also allow people
who have large tables using the money type but can't realistically
wait out a table rewrite to upgrade to a newer version of Postgres.
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2023-12-12 12:14:24 | Re: Issue with pg_get_functiondef |
Previous Message | Aksel Allas | 2023-12-12 11:47:31 | Re: BUG #18242: pg_dump with non-superuser from pg14 to pg15 fails on ALTER FUNCTION |