On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:53:34 +0200 Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> wrote: > Every new type needs to have a well-defined use-case before it can be > considered for includion.
Well, it is already included. The current proposal is simply to improve the existing type. I guess you are arguing a different proposal altogether - to remove the existing type. > Currently we have: > - Is possibly faster than numeric I suppose I should quantify this but it's hard to get motivated after the many man-hours (mine and my staff) I had to spend on code and schema optimizations I needed to do just to get closer to the previous speed our aps had before we converted from money to numeric. I will try to find time to put together a test that appoximates that real world example. > - Takes less space than numeric Never really considered this a major improvement over numeric given the cost of disk these days. I suppose it could be contributing to the speed increase. > - Customisable output (only one currency at a time though) > - Fixed number of decimal places The original code actually handled number of decimal places. It tended to cause problems though. These are areas that the existing type, as well as the proposed change, could be worked on. I would hesitate to work on both together though and going to 64bit will probably add more value right now than those things, certainly for existing users of the type. By the way, the current proposal actually removes the currency symbol but I have received complaints about that. It should probably go back just because it is outside of the scope of the primary change. That can be dealt with later. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
