On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:46:40 -0400
Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 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.
I wonder if our vision isn't a little tunneled here. Using this type
for money is, perhaps, a specialized use and the type should really be
called something else and modified to remove all connotations of money
from it. So...
- Drop the currency symbol
- Allow number of decimals to be defined once for the column
- Don't use locale except to specify decimal separator (',' vs. '.')
- Allow operations against numeric
Not sure what to rename it to. Decimal would be good if it wasn't
already in use. Maybe DecimalInt.
> 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
Seems like something that can be stored in a different column.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 788 2246 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
IM: da...@vex.net, VOIP: sip:da...@vex.net
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
