On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 03:25:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > No, what he showed was correct. I'm talking about a different facet > of the problem:
> ... > Even if that took account of the exchange rate, it'd not be great. > But it doesn't; it's just the same digits reinterpreted with a new > currency sign and possibly a different number of fractional digits. > This might be sort of tolerable if your database only ever deals in > one currency, but even then you'd likely want to lock down what that > currency is. Making it be controlled by a user-set GUC was probably > not a great idea. Yes, I get it now, thanks. Not useful, I agree. -- Ian
