Re: Constrainting NUMBER

From: Gunter Herrmann <notformail0405_at_comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 22:03:43 -0400
Message-ID: <429fba80$0$14745$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>

Hi!

DA Morgan wrote:

> All true but the point remains. You wouldn't define a currency column
> as FLOAT(126): Ever!

No, I would not. Ever!
But hyper inflation in Turkey (until the recent cutting of Zeros) has caused some software companies real problems. A FLOAT(126) would have been useful.
I just wanted to point out that some pretty 'obvious' restrictions may be stupid if you want to create something extendable.

A friend of mine in Germany took over a job as project manager for a geographical system developed for a customer in a German state. When someone in another state was interested in this system he found out the basic design limited entries in the (Oracle) data base to sites within the area of that primary customer. When he found out what happened he organized a complete redesign to cover the whole earth.
Aditionally he requested a multi language design for further development.
BTW: Had he been in charge from the beginning this would not have happened.

brgds

-- 
Gunter Herrmann
Naples, Florida, USA

Received on Thu Jun 02 2005 - 21:03:43 CDT