RE: Timestamp - to be or not to be?

From: Rognes, Sten <Sten.Rognes_at_schwab.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:19:50 -0800
Message-ID: <A252B2CDF6D2D4119DAB0002A51326DE20333D65@n1028smx.nt.schwab.com>

If you are on 9.2 and your application is using Oracle's thin jdbc drivers to connect to the database, you might want to take a trip to Metalink and check out bug# 3037615. There is a test case provided in the bug description as well as possible workarounds.

Sten

-----Original Message-----

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Mark Moynahan
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:37 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: Timestamp - to be or not to be?

Hi,

Are there any technical reasons not to go forth with timestamp instead of date datatype? Are there any gotcha's by converting to timestamp?

If an application doesn't use fractions of a second is there any real need to use timestamp datatype?

Thanks,

Mark

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/

FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html


-----------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com


----------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org

put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html

Received on Thu Mar 18 2004 - 15:49:36 CST