Oninit cdi / Archive
Talk to an expert →

Weird date problem with ISQL 7.20.UD6 on SE 7.7.24.UC7 and IBM AIX 4.3.3

Posted in 2000

Topics: Connectivity: ESQL/C, 4GL & Embedded SQL, Platform-Specific Issues

PN — — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

I'm having problem with date using ISQL 7.20.UD6 on an IBM RISC6000 AIX 4.3.3 For some reason, all the dates I enter in an ACE report (as variable) returned as 12/31/1899 (yes, the year is 1899, not 1999) no matter what year I put in, including year 2000. DBCENTURY was on, and the 4GL application on the same SE 7.24.UC7 is running fine. Not all Ace reports face this problem. Those that I created and compiled long ago are working properly with dates and formats (using blah blah ...) Any input is greatly appreciated. Thanks PN pnguyen@lightspeed.net

↪ replying to PN
Network Behavioral Health Care — — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

12/31/1899 is the default NULL date. Basically, your date fields are not getting an assigned value, so you get this date instead. If it's an ace report, make sure your variables are not the same name as what you're selecting. Also, if no rows are returned, you'll likely get this date too. It's nothing to really worry about and it's not a bug. Good luck. Jeff Raihanan PN <pnguyen@lightspeed.net> wrote: > I'm having problem with date using ISQL 7.20.UD6 on an IBM RISC6000 AIX > 4.3.3 > For some reason, all the dates I enter in an ACE report (as variable) > returned as 12/31/1899 (yes, the year is 1899, not 1999) no matter what year > I put in, including year 2000. > DBCENTURY was on, and the 4GL application on the same SE 7.24.UC7 is running > fine. > Not all Ace reports face this problem. Those that I created and compiled > long ago are working properly with dates and formats (using blah blah ...) > Any input is greatly appreciated. > Thanks > PN > pnguyen@lightspeed.net

↪ replying to PN
PN — — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

Would DBCENTURY = C have anything to do with this? I use full qualified date format "MM/DD/YYYY" for input, DBCENTURY shouldn't be a factor in this, right? Thanks "PN" <pnguyen@lightspeed.net> wrote in message news:7yCv4.69639$Cn1.1443689@news5.giganews.com... > I'm having problem with date using ISQL 7.20.UD6 on an IBM RISC6000 AIX > 4.3.3 > For some reason, all the dates I enter in an ACE report (as variable) > returned as 12/31/1899 (yes, the year is 1899, not 1999) no matter what year > I put in, including year 2000. > DBCENTURY was on, and the 4GL application on the same SE 7.24.UC7 is running > fine. > Not all Ace reports face this problem. Those that I created and compiled > long ago are working properly with dates and formats (using blah blah ...) > Any input is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks > PN > pnguyen@lightspeed.net > >

↪ replying to PN
David Kleppinger — — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

PN wrote: > > I'm having problem with date using ISQL 7.20.UD6 on an IBM RISC6000 AIX > 4.3.3 > For some reason, all the dates I enter in an ACE report (as variable) > returned as 12/31/1899 (yes, the year is 1899, not 1999) no matter what year > I put in, including year 2000. > DBCENTURY was on, and the 4GL application on the same SE 7.24.UC7 is running > fine. > Not all Ace reports face this problem. Those that I created and compiled > long ago are working properly with dates and formats (using blah blah ...) This is NOT the null date. This is the 0 (zero) date. I'd guess when you passed the parameters to the ace report from the shell you didn't quote the values so you got month divided by day divided by year which gave an integerized value of 0 and hence the date of 12/31/1899. -- +----------------------------------------------------------+ David Kleppinger DKleppinger@dts.edu Assoc. Dir. of Admin. Computing Dallas Theological Seminary +----------------------------------------------------------+

Glossary