SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


SQL 6.5 and Y2K


SQL 6.5 and Y2K

Author
Message
Henrico Bekker
Henrico Bekker
SSCertifiable
SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 7488 Visits: 5012
Comments posted to this topic are about the item SQL 6.5 and Y2K

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thing is addressing problems that dont exist. Its solution-ism at its worst. We are dumbing down machines that are inherently superior. - Gilfoyle
bitbucket-25253
bitbucket-25253
SSCoach
SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)SSCoach (15K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 15665 Visits: 25280
Boy oh boy did that make the old brain cells churn. Who would of thought this bit of ancient history would rise once again

If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked something.

Ron

Please help us, help you -before posting a question please read

Before posting a performance problem please read
malleswarareddy_m
malleswarareddy_m
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2739 Visits: 1189
I did not any thing about SQL 6.5 ,7.0.Also i did little work on SQL server 2000.Worked mostly on 2005 and 2008.This question is almost ten years old.

Malleswarareddy
I.T.Analyst
MCITP(70-451)
sqljohn (twitter)
sqljohn (twitter)
SSC-Enthusiastic
SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (165 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 165 Visits: 76
that one should have been filed under 'pointless', anyone still concerned with the Y2K compliance of version 6.5 has bigger issues
Ronald H
Ronald H
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)SSCommitted (1.7K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1664 Visits: 630
I did the right guess! Smile

10 Years ago I wasn't SQL Server aware, since then I upgraded myself a few times to what I am now...

Ronald Hensbergen

Help us, help yourself... Post data so we can read and use it: http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2+2=5 for significant large values of 2
SQLRNNR
SQLRNNR
SSC Guru
SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)SSC Guru (66K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 66341 Visits: 18570
I actually remember this one. Thanks for the question. Would you believe that there are still some installs of 6.5 out there in the world?



Jason AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
I have given a name to my pain...
MCM SQL Server, MVP


SQL RNNR

Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw

vk-kirov
vk-kirov
SSCarpal Tunnel
SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)SSCarpal Tunnel (4.3K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 4338 Visits: 4408
The question forces to make an archaeological excavation :-D
Henrico Bekker
Henrico Bekker
SSCertifiable
SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 7488 Visits: 5012
Jason, I'm actually aware of a few places who are forced by legacy apps to run 6.5....and by the looks of this:

Correct answers: 38% (54)
Incorrect answers: 62% (89)
Total attempts: 143

not too many people were/are aware of the y2k issue on 6.5.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thing is addressing problems that dont exist. Its solution-ism at its worst. We are dumbing down machines that are inherently superior. - Gilfoyle
tommyh
tommyh
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)SSCrazy (2.5K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2536 Visits: 2000
Henrico Bekker (8/13/2010)
Jason, I'm actually aware of a few places who are forced by legacy apps to run 6.5....and by the looks of this:

Correct answers: 38% (54)
Incorrect answers: 62% (89)
Total attempts: 143

not too many people were/are aware of the y2k issue on 6.5.


Which really doesnt matter. Because if your where to get any problems because of this you would already have gotten them.

And no i dont know if there where some patches needed for Windows 95/98 to make them Y2K compatible as well either.

Do i care... no.
Is it important... no.
Is it fun... no.
Is it relevant... no.
Did i learn something... no.
Valuable leason... no.
Waste of time... yes.
Is writing this replay pointless... yes.
Is it Friday... YES :-D

And by that note ur forgiven ;-)
cengland0
cengland0
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)SSCrazy (2.2K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2234 Visits: 1300
Although I did get the answer right, I had to pick the closest response to the correct answer.

Technically, it was version 6.50.339 that fixed the Y2K issue. Then, Service Pack 5 came out (version 6.50.415) which was defective and you shouldn't have used it. Then, Service Pack 5a (version 6.50.416) released.

So, you could have fixed the Y2K problem before the release of SP5a if you installed the "Y2K" hot fix to the 6.50.281 (SP4) or 6.50.297 versions.
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search