Coming from using SQL Server, money was the easiest way I saw to replicate 
FORMAT(<value>,'C2') for reporting purposes but then I guess I could have just 
cast it as money for the report/view. Beyond that, using NUMERIC(<num>,2) works 
fine.

Brian Powell Jr, EI

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan S. Katz <jk...@postgresql.org> 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 3:12 PM
To: Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>; Erik Wienhold <e...@ewie.name>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com>; b.powell...@outlook.com; 
pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Monetary Data Types Improvement

On 3/20/24 11:07 AM, Dave Cramer wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 10:59, Erik Wienhold <e...@ewie.name 
> <mailto:e...@ewie.name>> wrote:
> 
>     On 2024-03-18 23:24 +0100, David Rowley wrote:
>      > My vote would go to adding a deprecation notice to that section
>     of the
>      > docs.  There's some talk [1] about how we discourage the usage of the
>      > money type and that goes on to discuss the possibilities of moving it
>      > into a contrib module.
>      >
>      > My hope would be that deprecation notice would steer most people away
>      > from using it and therefore reduce the number of questions about it
>      > due to fewer new use cases of it.
>      >
>      > [1]
>     https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/zxgh74ykj3iwv...@paquier.xyz
>     
> <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/zxgh74ykj3iwv...@paquier.xyz>
> 
>     +1
> 
>     Huh, I didn't know that it used to have a deprecation notice at some
>     point.  But that note was removed in 8.3:
> 
>     
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20071009123315.5fb283c1.darcy%40
> druid.net 
> <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20071009123315.5fb283c1.darcy%4
> 0druid.net>
> 
> 
> Sadly that was a mistake. Money is not really a useful type.

Here's[1] the latest "let's remove money" discussion (there's allegedly a 
hackers thread too, but I'm having trouble finding it.

+1 on reinstating the deprecation notice, given it'll be some years
before we can fully remove it (at least based on the discussion).

Thanks,

Jonathan

[1] 
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/18240-c5da758d7dc1ecf0%40postgresql.org

Reply via email to