

SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:45 AM
Points: 2,403,
Visits: 3,431


I have now had some time to check the math for the formula.
The short story is that if the anchor date is a leapyear the algorithm fails. If you change the anchor date to 20000101 or 18960101, the algorithm will give wrong result. That gives us nonleapyears to work with. Any nonleapyear starting not starting with monday will faill too.
First day of year is Monday +++  Yes  No  ++ Yes  F  F  +++ No  W  F  +++ Leap year
Accidentally, the date 00010101 will work as it is a nonleapyear starting with monday, and so will 17530101 and 19000101.
N 56°04'39.16" E 12°55'05.25"




SSCForever
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:01 PM
Points: 40,532,
Visits: 37,770


SwePeso (7/24/2013)
I have now had some time to check the math for the formula. The short story is that if the anchor date is a leapyear the algorithm fails. If you change the anchor date to 20000101 or 18960101, the algorithm will give wrong result. That gives us nonleapyears to work with. Any nonleapyear starting not starting with monday will faill too. First day of year is Monday +++  Yes  No  ++ Yes  F  F  +++ No  W  F  +++ Leap year
Accidentally, the date 00010101 will work as it is a nonleapyear starting with monday, and so will 17530101 and 19000101.
That doesn't appear to be entirely correct but anything before '19000101' certainly appears to be screwed. Here's the proof code that shows that. I sure wish I had thought of this test when I wrote the article. I'll have Steve pull the article and see if I can come up with a simple fix. Thanks, Peter.
===== Build all dates from 17530101 through 99991231 WITH cteGenDates AS ( SELECT TOP (DATEDIFF(dd,'1753','99991231')+1) Date = DATEADD(dd,ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT NULL))1,'1753') FROM master.sys.all_columns ac1, master.sys.all_columns ac2 ) === Do the calculated ISOWk from the article and the built in function  and capture enough other data to find where the calculation is incorrect. SELECT Date, DOW = DATENAME(dw,Date), CalculatedISOWk = (DATEPART(dy,DATEDIFF(dd,0,Date)/7*7+3)+6)/7, BuiltInISOWk = DATEPART(isowk,Date), IsLeapYear = ISDATE(DATENAME(yy,Date)+'0229') INTO #MyHead FROM cteGenDates ; ===== Find first or last weeks of each year that have an error. SELECT * FROM #MyHead WHERE (DATEPART(dy,Date) <= 8 OR DATEPART(dy,Date) >= 356) AND CalculatedISOWk <> BuiltInISOWk ORDER BY Date ;
Jeff Moden "RBAR is pronounced "reebar" and is a "Modenism" for "RowByAgonizingRow".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
Helpful Links: How to post code problems How to post performance problems




SSCForever
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:01 PM
Points: 40,532,
Visits: 37,770


Ah... Missed it. You were talking about changing the BASE date of "0" to something else. I'll check on that, too1 Thanks again, Peter. I just sent an email to Steve and the WebMaster asking them to pull the article until I can come up with a fix (unless you beat me to it ).
Jeff Moden "RBAR is pronounced "reebar" and is a "Modenism" for "RowByAgonizingRow".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
Helpful Links: How to post code problems How to post performance problems




SSCForever
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:01 PM
Points: 40,532,
Visits: 37,770


Well, I found the problem. The problem is with anything that has a base date of less than 0 or "19000101". Any correct calculations before then are simply a lucky shot it in the dark. The reason is the difference between dates produces a difference of days and not a date serial number. When the DATEPART(dy....) does its implicit conversion back to DATETIME, it's doing it based on that number of days rather than a true date serial number. I just so happens that the number of days matches the date serial number IF and only if the base date is 0 (19000101) AND the date being converted is >= the base date.
Jeff Moden "RBAR is pronounced "reebar" and is a "Modenism" for "RowByAgonizingRow".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
Helpful Links: How to post code problems How to post performance problems




SSCForever
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:01 PM
Points: 40,532,
Visits: 37,770


I still have some testing to do but it appears that converting the DATEDIFF back to a DATETIME using DATEADD instead of mistakenly allowing DATEPART to do it fixes all the problems. Here's the corrected formula. I'm using the base date of '1753' in this formula and it appears to be working correctly for all dates from 17530101 through 99991231. I still need to test it with the ranges of the "new" DATE datatype.
(DATEPART(dy,DATEADD(dd,DATEDIFF(dd,'1753',Date)/7*7+3 ,'1753'))+6)/7
Jeff Moden "RBAR is pronounced "reebar" and is a "Modenism" for "RowByAgonizingRow".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
Helpful Links: How to post code problems How to post performance problems




SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:45 AM
Points: 2,403,
Visits: 3,431


Any January 1st will do, as long as it is a monday in a nonleapyear.
I am running on SQL Server 2012 and have tested every January 1st between 0001 and 1900. Only some of them work, and the common denominator is that the working ones are nonleapyears.
N 56°04'39.16" E 12°55'05.25"




SSCForever
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:01 PM
Points: 40,532,
Visits: 37,770


SwePeso (7/26/2013) Any January 1st will do, as long as it is a monday in a nonleapyear.
I am running on SQL Server 2012 and have tested every January 1st between 0001 and 1900. Only some of them work, and the common denominator is that the working ones are nonleapyears.
In the above, you tested the new formula or the old? Like I said, the old one was totally screwed for any date prior to 19000101 and any semblance of actually working was purely accidental.
I got notice this morning that they took the article down as I requested. I'll have them put it back up after I make some changes.
Thanks again for finding the shortcoming, Peter. I appreciate it.
Jeff Moden "RBAR is pronounced "reebar" and is a "Modenism" for "RowByAgonizingRow".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
Helpful Links: How to post code problems How to post performance problems




SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:45 AM
Points: 2,403,
Visits: 3,431


Until Microsoft has fixed all date function to be DATE compliant, try thisCREATE FUNCTION dbo.fnISOWEEK ( @Date DATE ) RETURNS TINYINT AS BEGIN RETURN ( SELECT CASE WHEN nextYear <= theDate THEN 0 WHEN currYear <= theDate THEN (theDate  currYear) / 7 ELSE (theDate  prevYear) / 7 END + 1 FROM ( SELECT (CASE WHEN prevYear % 400 = 0 THEN 366 WHEN prevYear % 100 = 0 THEN 365 WHEN prevYear % 4 = 0 THEN 366 ELSE 365 END + theDate  theDoY + 4) / 7 * 7 AS prevYear, (theDate  theDoY + 4) / 7 * 7 AS currYear, (CASE WHEN currYear % 400 = 0 THEN 366 WHEN currYear % 100 = 0 THEN 365 WHEN currYear % 4 = 0 THEN 366 ELSE 365 END + theDate  theDoY + 4) / 7 * 7 AS nextYear, theDate FROM ( SELECT DATEPART(YEAR, @Date)  1 AS prevYear, DATEPART(YEAR, @Date) AS currYear, DATEDIFF(DAY, '00010101', @Date) AS theDate, DATEPART(DAYOFYEAR, @Date) AS theDoY ) AS d ) AS d ) END
N 56°04'39.16" E 12°55'05.25"




SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:45 AM
Points: 2,403,
Visits: 3,431


Or this, if you want to get rid of all Microsoft dependencies. This will work for SQL 2000 and onwards, and on all dates between 00010101 and 99991231.
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.fnISOWEEK ( @Year SMALLINT, @Month TINYINT, @Day TINYINT ) RETURNS TINYINT AS BEGIN RETURN ( SELECT CASE WHEN nextYearStart <= theDate THEN 0 WHEN currYearStart <= theDate THEN (theDate  currYearStart) / 7 ELSE (theDate  prevYearStart) / 7 END + 1 FROM ( SELECT (currJan4  365  prevLeapYear) / 7 * 7 AS prevYearStart, currJan4 / 7 * 7 AS currYearStart, (currJan4 + 365 + currLeapYear) / 7 * 7 AS nextYearStart, CASE @Month WHEN 1 THEN @Day WHEN 2 THEN 31 + @Day WHEN 3 THEN 59 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 4 THEN 90 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 5 THEN 120 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 6 THEN 151 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 7 THEN 181 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 8 THEN 212 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 9 THEN 243 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 10 THEN 273 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 11 THEN 304 + @Day + currLeapYear WHEN 12 THEN 334 + @Day + currLeapYear END + currJan4  4 AS theDate FROM ( SELECT CASE WHEN (@Year  1) % 400 = 0 THEN 1 WHEN (@Year  1) % 100 = 0 THEN 0 WHEN (@Year  1) % 4 = 0 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END AS prevLeapYear, CASE WHEN @Year % 400 = 0 THEN 1 WHEN @Year % 100 = 0 THEN 0 WHEN @Year % 4 = 0 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END AS currLeapYear, 365 * (@Year  1) + (@Year  1) / 400  (@Year  1) / 100 + (@Year  1) / 4 + 3 AS currJan4 WHERE @Year BETWEEN 0 AND 9999 AND @Month BETWEEN 1 AND 12 AND @Day >= 1 AND 1 = CASE WHEN @Month IN (1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12) AND @Day <= 31 THEN 1 WHEN @Month IN (4, 6, 9, 11) AND @Day <= 30 THEN 1 WHEN @Year % 400 = 0 AND @Day <= 29 THEN 1 WHEN @Year % 100 = 0 AND @Day <= 28 THEN 1 WHEN @Year % 4 = 0 AND @Day <= 29 THEN 1 WHEN @Day <= 28 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END ) AS d ) AS d ) END
N 56°04'39.16" E 12°55'05.25"




SSCForever
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:01 PM
Points: 40,532,
Visits: 37,770


Peter. I've receive several emails from you. Have you received any of mine?
Jeff Moden "RBAR is pronounced "reebar" and is a "Modenism" for "RowByAgonizingRow".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
Helpful Links: How to post code problems How to post performance problems



