Re: Rumours

OK, let's travel the road again. Seems I've been down this road a dozen times now.

Due to the way Oracle stores dates, the RDBMS in any release of version 8, 7, and probably back to the year dot has not had an issue with Y2K, unless there has been a bug. The century is always stored.

How your ***application*** deals with displaying it is another issue.

HTH. Pete

Kenneth C Stahl wrote:

> What about 7.3.2? Is it fully Y2K complient or will it have problems?
>
> Sybrand Bakker wrote:
>
> > Statement by an Oracle support rep in a Dutch Oracle Magazine shows
> > otherwise:
> > 7.3.3 is not on the Y2k list because it is not supported anymore. This
> > doesn't necessarily mean 7.3.3 is not Y2K compliant. In fact it is. They
> > deleted it because of the support status.
> >
> > Hth,
> >
> > Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA
> >
> > Glenn Baron <gbaron_at_dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
> > news:01bec3e4$8c45d860$c74995c1_at_default...
> > > Phone call from my boss today .. he was at a Usergroup meeting, and was
> > > desperate to know what (exact) version of Oracle we were on. Turns out
> > that
> > > Oracle U.K. are about to announce that only versions 7.3.4 and higher will
> > > be supported from 2000 onwards. Rumours that 7.3.3 and below *might* not
> > be
> > > entirely Y2K compliant...
> > > Hmmm, we'll see
> > >
> > > Glenn Baron

--
Regards

Pete

Received on Thu Jul 01 1999 - 14:55:14 CDT