Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2])
	by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA31453
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>;
	Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:31:10 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13338;
	Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
To: Mark Lillywhite <mark@plasticsoftware.com.au>
cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] JDBC: BigDecimal and Money confusion 
In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:59:32 +1000
	<37E33854.715C30AE@plasticsoftware.com.au>
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:30:11 -0400
Message-ID: <13336.937665011@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Mark Lillywhite <mark@plasticsoftware.com.au> writes:
> (As an aside, I found the PGMoney class but it too only accepts doubles. I
> could use doubleValue() on the BigDecimal but I am worried about the loss of
> precision given my past experience. So my position is that I reckon I should
> be able to use arbitrary precision up until the database interprets it).

Mark, I dunno what Postgres version you are using, but there is a
genuine arbitrary-precision-decimal NUMERIC type in Postgres 6.5 & up.
That's probably what you should be using.  The old 'money' type is a
hack, because it overflows too easily.  ($20 million ain't what it
used to be ;-).)  It's now deprecated and will probably go away
entirely at some point.

			regards, tom lane