Re: Year 2000 problem

Ken Denny wrote:
>
> usha_at_netcom.ca(Neelesh Anil Shah) wrote:
> >
> >
> >Can anybody give a clear description about the Year 2000 problem and
> >possible solutions for that.
> >
> >Any info on this will be much appreciated.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Neelesh Shah
> >
> >____________________________________________________________
> >Neelesh Shah / Usha N Ph : 905 306 1410
> >2343, Hurontario St, #103, Fx : 905 306 1410
> >Mississauga, Ontario, L5A 2E8 Email : usha_at_netcom.ca
> >____________________________________________________________
> >
> Neelesh,
>
> If you use Oracle's DATE datatype there is no problem. The problem many sites are
> going to have is that they store dates in six digit numeric fields with the date
> in YYMMDD format (note only two digits for the year). The problem is going to be
> because the year 00 is less than the year 99 when you store it that way. Many
> applications written years ago did not consider that they would still be in use in
> the year 2000, but SURPRISE, many of them still are and they will need
> modification to handle this.
>
> Regards
> Ken Denny
>
> --
>
> /| /
> / | / _ _
> |< / \ /|/ \
> | \ \ / / | \
> | \__X___/ | \___

A quick solution could be to use the date format DDMMRR, where RR goes from year xx50 to year xx49 Received on Sun Apr 14 1996 - 00:00:00 CEST