January 9, 2009 at 5:58 am
Values from same logic are truncates in 2005 but are not truncated in 2000
January 9, 2009 at 6:17 am
truncation implies that x number of characters of a string are not being saved....that wouldn't happen to a number(int for example)
do you mean decimal information? the definition for your columns should be the same in the databases for 2000 and 2005, if they are not, who knows where you might have problems.
...for example, if you create a decimal(19,4), that means 19 chars total, and 4 of them to the right of the decimal place.
if you stick that value in a decimal(19,0), you'd lose the info to the right of hte decimal.
is that what you are talking about?
Lowell
January 9, 2009 at 6:31 am
manojshyam (1/9/2009)
Values from same logic are truncates in 2005 but are not truncated in 2000
Do you have a question, or is this just a statement?
January 9, 2009 at 7:25 am
Source is numeric(13,2)
Initial view gets correct value with decimal but when finally I combine the result by doing multiple unions I don't get the decimals and get the truncated value
January 9, 2009 at 7:26 am
I am aware of that , the filed is numeric(13,2)
January 9, 2009 at 7:39 am
Please post table definitions, sample data, the query and show what you think you should be getting, and what you are. Read this to see the best way to post this to get quick responses.
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply