Bruce Momjian wrote:
> That's a tough call. We already have some duplicate type symbols, but
> this is not a standard SQL type. I would see if we can get others to
> say it is a good idea.
But the DOUBLE keyword is already reserved by ANSI for use in the "DOUBLE
PRECISION" type, so a "DOUBLE" synonym for it shouldn't make much of a
difference. Right?
- Mark Butler
