Re: DDS Time vs. DDL Time -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:06 PM, CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The DDL supports a concept of "without default" whereas DDS does not,
and DDS supports a specific TIMFMT() and TIMSEP() whereas DDL does not.
However neither of those should be relevant to the above as far as I
can infer; the *ISO time format [hh.mm.ss] being used should be
compatible irrespective of any TIMFMT given the activity is SQL versus
RLA, and given that an actual value is specified for the I\O there
should be no issue for a NULL value being restricted.

You'd think ISO format would work...but at least with the JDBC driver
I've been bit in the past by the system returning ISO formatted dates
when the toolbox defaulted to MDY...

It took fixes in both JT400 and the OS to get things to play nice..
http://www-912.ibm.com/j_dir/JTOpen.nsf/8178b1c14b1e9b6b8525624f0062fe9f/724A5B9B43AEC7EC862575770009AAAE?OpenDocument

So it might be worthwhile to confirm that everything
matches...particularly if the OP is at v5r4...

Charles

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.