Re: Money type

On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 06:11:43AM -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> I know that the money type is supposed to be deprecated but I think that 
Right.

> there is still some benefit to it.  It is small and fast.  There are some 
> problems and I would like to address them.
> 
> The output has a dollar sign attached.  This is NA centric and we said years 
> ago that we were going to drop it.  I think that that is enough warning.  
> Unless someone has a problem with that I will just go in and get rid of it.
> 
> Also somewhat NA centric is the two decimal places.  This was originally 
> meant to be locale driven but that is a problem for other reasons.  What 
> about defaulting it to two decimal places but allowing it to be redefined at 
> table creation time?  How hard would it be to make it accept an optional 
> precision?
>
> It doesn't cast to other types.  If it simply cast to float that would allow 
> it to be more flexible.  Do I need to add a float return function for that to 
> work?
> 
> Limited precision.  This can be fixed by going to a 64 bit integer for the 
> underlying type.  Are we at a point where we can do that yet?  I am afraid 
> that there are still systems that don't have a native 64 bit type.  This is 
> not as critical as the other items I think.
I think right is use numeric and to_char() for currency symbol and common and locales correct number formatting. IMHO
it'sbetter thanuse dagerous float and hard coded currency symbol.
 
For example in my country (and a lot of others) is the current moneydatetype total useless. We have currency symbol
afternumber, etc.
 
Sorry but _IMHO_ is better a less good supported types than more bad datetypes.
       Karel

-- Karel Zak  <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz,
http://mape.jcu.cz