RE: Y2K compliant? Informix 7.23 UC4 ?
jmhorn wrote in message <7o39gm$i7n$1@news.xmission.com>... > >I have recently discussed version 7.24 UC9 with Informix tech support, which >is not currently available for order. So I think there would be known issues >with everything up to that point. Well, it should mean that they've had a stab at resolving all the Y2K issues known about to the freeze date. But there's no guarantee that they will have been done correctly and, as Jim Lowry said, no guarantee that new "features" will not have been introduced. My personal view is that anyone doing serious Y2K testing really should have have settled on a chosen release with a few weeks at the very latest. Will there be time to evaluate 7.24UC9, or any forthcoming release, before Y2k testing? Neil Truby Londis Stores Hampton Hill, UK
I have recently discussed version 7.24 UC9 with Informix tech support, which is not currently available for order. So I think there would be known issues with everything up to that point. mac- > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org > [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org]On Behalf Of Dave Lahoti > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 1999 2:52 PM > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Y2K compliant? Informix 7.23 UC4 ? > > > > Hi DBA's, > I was curious to know that if Informix indicates an issue with 7.24 > UC8, > can I take that to mean that all prior versions leading up to 7.24 UC8 > have > issues? > > I am running on 7.23 UC4. > > Thanks, > Dave Lahoti > > http://www.informix.com/informix/products/year2000/y2khist.htm >
Thought I'd comment, seeing as how my name was used...ha-ha 8-) We have chosen 7.23UC1 to enter 2000. We did not base this on just Y2K... The changes in the engine 7.23 to 7.3 would not allow us the time needed to re-code for 7.3, test the code and then go back into Y2K testing. So for those of you who have not picked the engine to enter 2000... time is running out for code and Y2K testing... remember, if the code does not work you will have to either re-write and test, then do Y2K or go back to the engine that worked with your code and Y2K test from there. Good luck everyone 8-) Neil Truby wrote: > > jmhorn wrote in message <7o39gm$i7n$1@news.xmission.com>... > > > >I have recently discussed version 7.24 UC9 with Informix tech support, > which > >is not currently available for order. So I think there would be known > issues > >with everything up to that point. > > Well, it should mean that they've had a stab at resolving all the Y2K > issues known about to the freeze date. But there's no guarantee that they > will have been done correctly and, as Jim Lowry said, no guarantee that new > "features" will not have been introduced. > > My personal view is that anyone doing serious Y2K testing really should have > have settled on a chosen release with a few weeks at the very latest. Will > there be time to evaluate 7.24UC9, or any forthcoming release, before Y2k > testing? > > Neil Truby > Londis Stores > Hampton Hill, UK
>So for those of you who have not picked the engine >to enter 2000... time is running out for code and >Y2K testing... remember, if the code does not work >you will have to either re-write and test, then do >Y2K or go back to the engine that worked with your >code and Y2K test from there. > Yes, I suppose this was the point I wanted to make, in my understated, not-wishing-to-upset-anyone British way - you really shouldn't be fannying about choosing a version for 2000 at this late stage, you should be getting on with testing your choice. Neil