On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 02:52:44PM +0200, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Karel Zak wrote:
>
> > I think it's pretty extendable solution in contrast to the current
> > hardcoded in/out datetypes functions.
>
> Who are we formatting for? If the client wants the data in a specific
> format then they can do SELECT to_char(...), or do the formatting in the
> client all together.
Yes. But some people call for datetypes with integrated formatting (forexample "money"). I think we should support
_common_ way how doformatting (not only for "money") _OR_ we should reject types like"money" and do formatting
onlyby extra functions like to_char().
> The database should manage data, presenting it to the user in different
> ways are the job of a client.
Sure, do you want to read data in binary format that PostgreSQL uses indb files or do you expect it in some nice
string?PostgreSQL alreadydoes data formating almost for all datetypes -- see sources anddatetypes in/out
functions.
Karel
-- Karel Zak <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/
