Y2K PROBLEM 
Author Message
 Y2K PROBLEM

Will placing set epoch in DBU.PRG after the fact correct the fact that
year 2000 date was interpreted as the year 1900.

If it doesn't correct it, could somebody please provide me with a
solution that will enable me to fix this situation in the most
expedient and efficient way.  Thanks Gwen.

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.*-*-*.com/ The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!



Mon, 01 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Y2K PROBLEM
Nope.

Something like the following may help, depending on the range of your date
fields.  (Of course you'll have to do this for all affected date fields).
    Repl all datefield with datefield + 36525 for year(datefield) < 1920
Otherwise you'll have to manually change the ones you determine are wrong.

This is exactly the type of occurrences the Y2k Bug is all about;  too bad
you didn't do something about this before new years day.  Didn't you notice
all of the media hype regarding Y2k?


Quote:
> Will placing set epoch in DBU.PRG after the fact correct the fact that
> year 2000 date was interpreted as the year 1900.

> If it doesn't correct it, could somebody please provide me with a
> solution that will enable me to fix this situation in the most
> expedient and efficient way.  Thanks Gwen.

> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network
*
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!



Mon, 01 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Y2K PROBLEM

Quote:

> Will placing set epoch in DBU.PRG after the fact correct the fact that
> year 2000 date was interpreted as the year 1900.

[I assuming that "after the fact" is referring to data in a database?] No,
it won't. SET EPOCH has nothing to do with the content of database files or
indeed anything to do with date values. SET EPOCH simply controls the
conversion of strings to dates when that string doesn't contain all the
correct date information.

Quote:
> If it doesn't correct it, could somebody please provide me with a solution
> that will enable me to fix this situation in the most expedient and
> efficient way. Thanks Gwen.

Write a little utility to run thru the database and fix the dates.

--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |   w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard/ |     eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk/ |    weg - Norton Guide reader for Windows.
Free software, including........| dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Mon, 01 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Y2K PROBLEM
On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:05:43 -0800, ONYX

Quote:

>Will placing set epoch in DBU.PRG after the fact correct the fact that
>year 2000 date was interpreted as the year 1900.

>If it doesn't correct it, could somebody please provide me with a
>solution that will enable me to fix this situation in the most
>expedient and efficient way.  Thanks Gwen.

>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Gwen,

I attempted to email you with what I guessed was a correct email
address after editing...but no it bounced!


Regards,

Ross McKenzie
ValuSoft
(affordable source recovery available)
(Fix1900 utility available)
www.irvis.nl



Mon, 01 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 4 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. COBOL's HIGH-VALUE and Y2K problems (was Re: Engines to Die for Y2K

2. COBOL Y2K problem is small

3. minor Y2k problem ...

4. Scanning Smalltalk for Y2K problems

5. Y2K Problems

6. Does Linux have a Y2K problem?

7. Another Y2k Problem to Look for!

8. Scanning Smalltalk for Y2K problems

9. Y2K Problem

10. Append from sdf belated Y2K problem

11. Clipper Tools III Y2k problems

12. R&R Y2K problem ?

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software