Re: JD Edwards Dates

[Rob Berendt <rob@xxxxxxxxx>]

This makes no sense to me either.  Couldn't they call a standard 
routine which does all of their date processing?  If so they could 
have kept that other date format.  While I wouldn't have done it 
that way, it was effective.

Does JD Edwards support multiple platforms?  If so, maybe the reason 
that they chose the new date versus the new date field formats is 
because some database systems either are buggy or do not support date 
fields.  If that was the case perhaps they should have adopted CCYYMMDD.  
Let's figure.  CCYYMMDD packed takes 5 bytes.  XYYJLN packed takes 4 
bytes.  A one million record file with three date fields would then 
take an additional (1byte difference/field) * (3 fields/record) * 
1,000,000 records/file) = 3MB.  3MB * ($0.60/MB, cost of AS/400 disk 
space) = $1.80.  Gee you think they'll spend more then that trying to 
process this strange date?

Or, (conspiracy theory time), does JD Edwards market a report writer?  
With Query being so friendly they probably had to come up with a way 
to make you jump through more hoops to use dates and attempt to beat 
you into submission into purchasing their report writer.




mcrump@ballfoster.com on 10/15/98 11:42:49 AM
Please respond to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com@Internet
To:     midrange-l@midrange.com@Internet
cc:      

Subject:        JD Edwards Dates

Somewhere along the line I must not be living right because I seem to be
paying for it now...

We are in the process of upgrading from JDE A6.2 to A7.3.  We just came
across the documentation for date storage.  Historically, JDE has stored
stuff in Gregorian format in four seperate fields DD, MM, CC, and YY.

Now in 7.3 all dates are being changed to 'Julian'.  The format is XYYJLN
where X is a centery flag(0 = 19, 1 = 20), YY is year, and JLN is the
Julian day within a year.

According to their documentation, and I quote, 'Julian date processing
allows for the use of a single field, eases manipulation, sorting, and
calculation of dates'.

I'm real frustrated because we have to change a lot of access points.
Multiple systems, DDM files, modifications, and query tools.  Am I missing
the boat or does this change make sense.......besides benefiting JDE?

Respectfully but pretty ______ off,

Mike


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---