Re: YEAR 2000 Problem with existing Databases

From: Paul Roberts <proberts_at_isc901.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: 1995/12/19
Message-ID: <4b7d5h$ojh_at_cisu2.jsc.nasa.gov>#1/1


Bruno GEORGES <georgeb_at_worldnet.net>' wrote:
>
> YEAR 2000 Problem with existing Databases
>
> Newsgroups:
> comp.databases.oracle
>

<snip>   

>
>I just started working in IT and will be in charge very soon
>for resolving the famous "YEAR 2000" problem.
>
>My request is:
>
>Is there anybody who knows what are the main problems generated by
>this issue, and what are the actions to consider in an Information
>System.
>

Well, Bruno, the main problem is that everyone has sat around on their asses and failed to plan for the turn of the century! Those two-digit dates stored as something else are going to cause a headache. The most iritating part of the whole thing, though, is that some people won't even code for the year 2000 NOW when its only five years away.

BTW, you should know that the year 2000 is NOT a leap year in the Gregorian calendar!!! I know that its divisible by four, but there's this little exception to that rule that says if its divisible by 400, its not really a leap year.

Had enough confusion? No?

Some software companies who haven't allowed for this little "gotcha!" continue to ignore the non-leap-year problem, hoping it'll go away. Do they just plan to go out of business before then, or what? Be sure YOU plan for it, or on March 1, 2000 your end-users will be in deep doo-doo!

    _   _  _ _  __    : Paul Roberts                 
   |_  |_|  |  |      : Programmer / Analyst        
    _| | | _|_ |__    : proberts_at_isc901.jsc.nasa.gov 

Science Applications International Corporation

   (An employee-owned company)

  The opinions expressed are my own, and not necessarily   the views of SAIC, NASA, or the U.S. government. Received on Tue Dec 19 1995 - 00:00:00 CET

Original text of this message