From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | rod(at)iol(dot)ie |
Cc: | Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: About the MONEY type |
Date: | 2016-11-30 16:39:23 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwa-+RGeAbZsi4BrUNUC6D2h7ygc2_k44eMapU0g1gbQZQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Raymond O'Donnell <rod(at)iol(dot)ie> wrote:
>
> I seem to remember that it was actually deprecated at some point - this is
> going back quite a few years. This was later reversed, though I don't know
> why.
>
>
Because its pointless to deprecate something that you haven't replaced and
have no intention of just removing without a replacement.
I use money as a column type for a very specific reason:
I have data that comes to me in a money-like format (one which money can
handle, though I'm in the U.S. so its limitations don't affect me as much)
within a JSON body and I can use the "json_to_record"
to directly populate a target table without having either pre-process the
value or store it as text and then perform post-processing. Once I have it
in as money a simple cast to numeric is reliable.
Now, my GUI tool of choice chooses to simply return an empty string when
faced with data in money format but working within psql is solid.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2016-11-30 16:41:39 | Re: About the MONEY type |
Previous Message | George | 2016-11-30 15:56:11 | Index is not used for "IN (non-correlated subquery)" |