T-SQL

Question

T-SQL

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 41 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

shaycullen Right there with Babe Points: 781 More actions · Answer 1

Yeah, but the question did ask for the "output" - SQL Server will append the 00:00:00.000 onto the end, so technically none of the answers are correct.

John Mitchell-245523 SSC Guru Points: 148809 More actions · Answer 2

da-zero (12/15/2010)
When you specify 2002-02-02 in SQL Server, 2002-02-02 00:00:00.000 is automatically assumed, so the answers are still correct.

The precise result set is as follows:

(No column name)(No column name)(No column name)(No column name)

2002-02-02 00:00:00.0002049-02-02 00:00:00.0001950-02-02 00:00:00.0002000-02-02 00:00:00.000

Therefore the answers aren't quite correct. OK, the point of the question was to demonstrate century cutoffs, and not time portions. Even so, I think both the question and the answer do not show the rigour that should be expected from us as IT professionals.

John

Rune Bivrin SSCrazy Eights Points: 8439 More actions · Answer 3

shaycullen (12/15/2010)
Yeah, but the question did ask for the "output" - SQL Server will append the 00:00:00.000 onto the end, so technically none of the answers are correct.

SQL Server does nothing in particular (or at least not the server). It's a datetime value, and how it will look on the screen is determined by the client - in this case SQL Server Management Studio.

Nit picking.

Just because you're right doesn't mean everybody else is wrong.

Gopi S Ten Centuries Points: 1091 More actions · Answer 4

I apologize to all those who assumed all answers were wrong as time portion was missing.

As mentioned earlier, the objective of the question was to demonstrate century cutoffs and not any game puzzle :laugh: Anyhow i will note this point and make sure i publish accurate result without any assumption in future.

Thanks

Sean Lange SSC Guru Points: 286573 More actions · Answer 5

Good question. Don't worry about the people who are complaining about the question. There are some people who will complain no matter how clear the question is. Given the history of really tedious nit picking trick questions many people are trained to look for the most little inconsistency. My guess is that many of the people complaining would have gotten it wrong even if you had included all the details they are complaining about. 😉

Thanks for the time creating the question for us and the topic was learned by all of us.

_______________________________________________________________

Need help? Help us help you.

Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.

Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.

Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/

jeff.mason SSCrazy Eights Points: 9585 More actions · Answer 6

Boy does that question bring back memories. How many here have the scars of activity in 1998 and 1999 for Y2K? I bet any IT professional who had any interaction with SQL in those years got this one right. I can remember testing application after application to verify how that application would function given various year settings.

SanDroid SSChampion Points: 10068 More actions · Answer 7

Gopinath Srirangan (12/15/2010)
I apologize to all those who assumed all answers were wrong as time portion was missing.
As mentioned earlier, the objective of the question was to demonstrate century cutoffs and not any game puzzle :laugh: Anyhow i will note this point and make sure i publish accurate result without any assumption in future.
Thanks

I liked the question and considered it well written.

Sure the extra zeros were missing, but since there was no "NONE of the above" selection why would this confuse you? I actually apreciated them missing so as not to clutter the screen.

I wonder how many of those that complained about this have subitted a QOTD themselves? 😛

I have authored QOTD's for this site and I liked this one. 😎

SanDroid SSChampion Points: 10068 More actions · Answer 8

jeff.mason (12/15/2010)
Boy does that question bring back memories. How many here have the scars of activity in 1998 and 1999 for Y2K? I bet any IT professional who had any interaction with SQL in those years got this one right. I can remember testing application after application to verify how that application would function given various year settings.

I can raise my hand. I actually had to start in 1995 due to all the ETL from legacy systems because of Y2K. A solution to this date conversion issue was the first M$ SQL development task I was given.

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 9

Thanks for the question.

Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events

nigelg99 Say Hey Kid Points: 677 More actions · Answer 10

John Mitchell-245523 (12/15/2010)
I got this right, but I think the question should have been qualified with something like "on an instance installed with the default settings". Otherwise the answer should be "it depends on the value of the two digit year cutoff setting in sp_configure".
John

I think we should be able to assume that in the absence of wording to the contrary, the default environment for the question is to use the default settings. 😀

I think most people that went through the 1999-2000 "millennium bug" period now use 4 digit years! I know I do.

John Mitchell-245523 SSC Guru Points: 148809 More actions · Answer 11

Gopinath

Thanks for the question, which demonstrated a useful point. Please accept my criticisms in the spirt of constructive feedback which, of course, you are free to ignore if you choose! My point was that, although most people (including me) would assume default settings, it's safer not to (have to) make assumptions at all. I also take Rune's point that the answer does depend on the client, so I'll concede that one!

John

SanjayAttray SSChampion Points: 13157 More actions · Answer 12

Interesting question. this info is new to me.

SQL DBA.

Michael Poppers SSCrazy Points: 2149 More actions · Answer 13

Sean Lange (12/15/2010)
Good question. Don't worry about the people who are complaining about the question. There are some people who will complain no matter how clear the question is. Given the history of really tedious nit picking trick questions many people are trained to look for the most little inconsistency. My guess is that many of the people complaining would have gotten it wrong even if you had included all the details they are complaining about. 😉
Thanks for the time creating the question for us and the topic was learned by all of us.

Agreed x 2 :-).

OCTom SSChampion Points: 11785 More actions · Answer 14

The Y2K rush was exciting, boring, tedious, scary...

This question does make one wonder why 2-digit years are still in use. However, since SQL Server dates only go out to 12-31-9999, we should get ready for y10k soon. 😉

Thanks for bringing back the memories.

UMG Developer SSChampion Points: 13482 More actions · Answer 15

UMG Developer

SSChampion

Points: 13482

December 15, 2010 at 3:32 pm

#1263199

Thanks for the question!