Miracle Y2K problem among Oracle, NT, and Win95

From: Wilfred Lau <wilfred_at_flash.net>
Date: 1998/12/24
Message-ID: <F4HopK.B4y_at_enron.com>#1/1

Hi:

PLEASE HELP!!! PLEASE HELP!!! [Quoted] First of all, neither I am not an Oracle nor a database person, but I am working on a Y2K compliant test for the department with an Oracle server for NT. An ambiguous issue came up from the test. The value of DATE data shows difference among the inputs from different workstations.

1. Update the record as '01-JAN-00' locally via SQL*Plus 3.3.2.0.2 from the Testing server running with NTS 4.0 w/SP4 and Oracle server 7.3.2 The date shows 01-JAN-1900 after I use (alter session set NLS_DATE_FORMAT='DD-MON-YYYY') command.
2. Update the same table via the same version SQL*PLUS on Windows 95 machine through LAN, the date shows 01-JAN-2000.
3. Update the same table via the SQL*PLUS 7.3.3 on a SUN workstation through LAN, the date also shows 01-JAN-2000.
4. create a table with only one DATE date type field on the production server which the testing server mirrors from. Insert the value '01-JAN-00' into the field. The date shows '01-JAN-1900' after I change the NLS_DATE_FORMAT.

Once I found the returned date shows 1900, our DBA changed the parameter to NLS_DATE_FORMAT = 'DD-MON-RR' in an initxxx.ora file (I believe it is a initializaton file). The instance shows the parameter is changed to 'RR', but the database parameter still shows 'YY'. Since I don't know how Oracle works, but by using 'RR' parameter, the date should shows 2000 if I input '00' in year 1998.

I made some assumptions and conditions about this test. (Please correct me if I am wrong)
1) The testing machine is a Compaq Proliant 1600R with P2-450 processor, the latest BIOS dated 8/17/98. This is a Y2K compliant system on hardware level.
2) By applying NT4 SP4, the NT machine should be Y2K complaint up to OS level. (I assume)
3) Oracle 7.3 server and SQL*Plus 3.3 are also Y2K compliant. 4) I know that our Windows 95 machine does not have Y2K patch installed yet. Therefore, it should not be Y2K compliant. (I assume)

For the above results with the set of assumptions and conditions, both the DBA and myself have not idea about it, However, we both guess that the Windows NT may not be Y2K compliant.

Today is Christmas Eve, I am still trying to figure out this problem. If anyone have some suggestions, please email to me. My email address is wlau_at_enron.com

Thanks and Merry Christmas

Wilfred Received on Thu Dec 24 1998 - 00:00:00 CET