I'm investigating a bug a customer has reported in our database abstraction layer, and it's making me very unhappy. Brief summary: I have a database abstraction layer which is intended to mediate between webapps and arbitrary database backends using JDBC. I am very unwilling indeed to write special-case code for particular databases. Our code has worked satisfactorily with many databases, including many instances MS SQLServer 2000 databases using the com.microsoft.sqlserver.SQLServerDriver. However, in this instance, the database won't accept dates. It won't accept dates in the java.sql.Date.toString() format (which is the ANSI SQL 92 format) and it won't accept dates in the ISO8601 format if they have a zone offset (which in the general case they do) - even if that zone offset is 'Z'. I find, by reading on Usenet, that SQL Server doesn't have a default date format. Furthermore, it doesn't take it's date format from Windows Regional settings. So how, for the love of God and Little Fishes, do I persuade a SQL Server database to accept ANSI SQL 92 dates, permanently, not on a per-session basis? -- simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; all in all you're just another click in the call
Simon, I'll agree this is very frustrating, but there is no easy answer, since there is no international standard for representation of datetime values. ISO-8601 has a huge number of options, and SQL Server accepts at least a couple of the ISO-8601 alternatives. If you have timezone information in data and want one product that works with all back ends, then you've probably got trouble. Not all products support timezones, so your data will end up with different values on different products. If you want consistency, either eliminate or convert the timezone data in your front end, and send every back end you connect to datetime values as strings of the form 'YYYYMMDD HH:MM:SS' (seconds optional or with fractional seconds as well). I thought you could also use '{d YYYY-MM-DD}' and it would work regardless of settings (unlike 'YYYY-MM-DD' which depends on date format settings). Not sure about this last bit, though. Does SQL Server have a default date format? This is several questions: Q. Does SQL Server display dates as character strings in a consistent way? A. SQL Server doesn't display anything. IDEs and front-ends do. Q. Does SQL Server CAST dates to strings with a consistent format? A. No. This depends on language settings. Q. Can SQL Server convert dates to strings with a consistent format? A. Yes, with CONVERT(varchar..., <format>) and string functions. Q. Does SQL Server import every ISO-8601-allowed date correctly? A. No. It does import a few of them correctly and consistently: YYYYMMDD HH:MM:SS.fff and YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS.fff for example. As far as I know, there is no timezone support. Q. Does CONVERT(datetime, ...) with format codes convert consistently? A. No. The documentation does not make this clear, but all the numerical, delimited formats except for the ISO format with the T depend on the connection's language or dateformat setting (dateformat overrides language, I believe). Why doesn't SQL Server consistently convert SQL-92 date strings? Good question. It converts SQL-92 timestamp (without timezone) correctly, but not date-only. It will, if the date format at the time of conversion is mdy, ymd, or myd, but I don't think that's a great solution. What's the safest date format to use? Probably 'YYYYMMDD HH:MM:SS.[fff]', an ISO format, since if someone truncates it to date-only, it won't break, like the SQL-92 timestamp form. -- Steve Kass -- Drew University -- Ref: 4BA55F69-6565-4B87-BB19-E223787FDB91 [quoted text, click to view] Simon Brooke wrote: > I'm investigating a bug a customer has reported in our database > abstraction layer, and it's making me very unhappy. > > Brief summary: > I have a database abstraction layer which is intended to mediate > between webapps and arbitrary database backends using JDBC. I am very > unwilling indeed to write special-case code for particular > databases. Our code has worked satisfactorily with many databases, > including many instances MS SQLServer 2000 databases using the > com.microsoft.sqlserver.SQLServerDriver. > > However, in this instance, the database won't accept dates. It won't > accept dates in the java.sql.Date.toString() format (which is the ANSI > SQL 92 format) and it won't accept dates in the ISO8601 format if they > have a zone offset (which in the general case they do) - even if that > zone offset is 'Z'. > > I find, by reading on Usenet, that SQL Server doesn't have a default > date format. Furthermore, it doesn't take it's date format from > Windows Regional settings. > > So how, for the love of God and Little Fishes, do I persuade a SQL > Server database to accept ANSI SQL 92 dates, permanently, not on a > per-session basis? >
Simon This may be useless, but you don't seem to have a lot SQL Server 2000-specific info. SQL server interprets data based on a 'collation' which is set at install time, and can be overridden manually in an SQL statement. To find the default collation for the database, the user will need to right click on the SQL server instance in Enterprise Manager and choose 'properties'. The default collation is displayed as part of the basinc database information. This can only be changed if the databases on the server are rebuilt. Some information below from the SQL server 'man pages' I haven't had the problems you describe, but if there is a configuration difference between two installs, which is causing the problem you describe, this is likely to be it. From what I understand, you are saying that one installation processes the dates OK, and the other does not. So SQL Server 2000 will do the job, it is just not configured correctly on one of the servers. good luck Ben McIntyre <snip> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Collation Options for International Support In Microsoft® SQL Serverâ„¢ 2000, it is not required to separately specify code page and sort order for character data, and the collation used for Unicode data. Instead, specify the collation name and sorting rules to use. The term, collation, refers to a set of rules that determine how data is sorted and compared. Character data is sorted using rules that define the correct character sequence, with options for specifying case-sensitivity, accent marks, kana character types, and character width. Microsoft SQL Server 2000 collations include these groupings: Windows collations Windows collations define rules for storing character data based on the rules defined for an associated Windows locale. The base Windows collation rules specify which alphabet or language is used when dictionary sorting is applied, as well as the code page used to store non-Unicode character data. For more information, see Collations. SQL collations SQL collations are provided for compatibility with sort orders in earlier versions of Microsoft SQL Server. For more information, see Using SQL Collations. Changing Collations After Setup When you set up SQL Server 2000, it is important to use the correct collation settings. You can change collation settings after running Setup, but you must rebuild the databases and reload the data. It is recommended that you develop a standard within your organization for these options. Many server-to-server activities can fail if the collation settings are not consistent across servers. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- How To How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility) To rebuild the master database Shutdown Microsoft® SQL Serverâ„¢ 2000, and then run Rebuildm.exe. This is located in the Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn directory. In the Rebuild Master dialog box, click Browse. In the Browse for Folder dialog box, select the \Data folder on the SQL Server 2000 compact disc or in the shared network directory from which SQL Server 2000 was installed, and then click OK. Click Settings. In the Collation Settings dialog box, verify or change settings used for the master database and all other databases. Initially, the default collation settings are shown, but these may not match the collation selected during setup. You can select the same settings used during setup or select new collation settings. When done, click OK. In the Rebuild Master dialog box, click Rebuild to start the process. The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master database. Note To continue, you may need to stop a server that is running.
Steve Kass <skass@drew.edu> writes: [quoted text, click to view] > Simon Brooke wrote: > > I have a database abstraction layer which is intended to mediate > > between webapps and arbitrary database backends using JDBC. I am very > > unwilling indeed to write special-case code for particular > > databases. Our code has worked satisfactorily with many databases, > > including many instances MS SQLServer 2000 databases using the > > com.microsoft.sqlserver.SQLServerDriver. > > However, in this instance, the database won't accept dates. It won't > > accept dates in the java.sql.Date.toString() format (which is the ANSI > > SQL 92 format) and it won't accept dates in the ISO8601 format if they > > have a zone offset (which in the general case they do) - even if that > > zone offset is 'Z'. > > I find, by reading on Usenet, that SQL Server doesn't have a default > > date format. Furthermore, it doesn't take it's date format from > > Windows Regional settings. So how, for the love of God and Little > > Fishes, do I persuade a SQL > > Server database to accept ANSI SQL 92 dates, permanently, not on a > > per-session basis? > Q. Does SQL Server import every ISO-8601-allowed date correctly? > A. No. It does import a few of them correctly and consistently: > YYYYMMDD HH:MM:SS.fff and YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS.fff for example.
Yes, but, actually, that's not a valid ISO-8601 format, because it doesn't include a timezone. Furthermore, I don't have the luxury of being able to generate custom code for every database. Surely it must be _possible_ to persuade SQL Server to conform to ANSI 92? [quoted text, click to view] > Why doesn't SQL Server consistently convert SQL-92 date strings? > Good question. It converts SQL-92 timestamp (without timezone) > correctly, but not date-only.
No, it doesn't. That is where all this grief started: we've been sending that to SQL Server for years and in every other installation it has worked, but now we have a customer using MS SQL Server 2000 who is having that fail consistently and repeatedly on one of their boxes (they have another box running identical software on which it is not failing, and on our box which we've one everythintg possible to make identical it doesn't fail). I've done everything I can to find a difference in setup between the boxes and so far I've failed. -- simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; all in all you're just another click in the call
[quoted text, click to view] Simon Brooke wrote: > Steve Kass <skass@drew.edu> writes: > > >>Simon Brooke wrote: >> >>>I have a database abstraction layer which is intended to mediate >>>between webapps and arbitrary database backends using JDBC. I am very >>>unwilling indeed to write special-case code for particular >>>databases. Our code has worked satisfactorily with many databases, >>>including many instances MS SQLServer 2000 databases using the >>>com.microsoft.sqlserver.SQLServerDriver. > > >>>However, in this instance, the database won't accept dates. It won't >>>accept dates in the java.sql.Date.toString() format (which is the ANSI >>>SQL 92 format) and it won't accept dates in the ISO8601 format if they >>>have a zone offset (which in the general case they do) - even if that >>>zone offset is 'Z'. >>>I find, by reading on Usenet, that SQL Server doesn't have a default >>>date format. Furthermore, it doesn't take it's date format from >>>Windows Regional settings. So how, for the love of God and Little >>>Fishes, do I persuade a SQL >>>Server database to accept ANSI SQL 92 dates, permanently, not on a >>>per-session basis? > > >>Q. Does SQL Server import every ISO-8601-allowed date correctly? >>A. No. It does import a few of them correctly and consistently: >> YYYYMMDD HH:MM:SS.fff and YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS.fff for example. > > > Yes, but, actually, that's not a valid ISO-8601 format, because it > doesn't include a timezone. Furthermore, I don't have the luxury of > being able to generate custom code for every database. Surely it must > be _possible_ to persuade SQL Server to conform to ANSI 92? >
My reference is ISO8601:2000E (December, 2000), and I don't see where a timezone is required. Do you have the paragraph number? Section 5.4 describes point-in-time representations, and says "The zone designator is empty if use is made of the local time of the day in accordance...", referring to earlier sections that give offer hhmm, hh:mm, hhmmss, hh:mm:ss, hh:mm,m, hhmm,m, hh, etc., etc., as possible date formats. It also gives Basic (no hyphens) and extended (with hyphens) formats for everything, without as far as I can see mandating one or the other. It would be nice if SQL Server understood them all, but it does understand the one with hyphens and a T (ISO allows the T to be omitted if no ambiguity results, though I couldn't see where any would regarding other ISO formats - probably missed something crazy like week numbers in BC years that used a T.) SQL Server also understands the one with no hyphens or T. It looks ok in ISO to omit date separators but include time separators. [quoted text, click to view] > >>Why doesn't SQL Server consistently convert SQL-92 date strings? >>Good question. It converts SQL-92 timestamp (without timezone) >>correctly, but not date-only. > > > No, it doesn't. That is where all this grief started: we've been > sending that to SQL Server for years and in every other installation > it has worked, but now we have a customer using MS SQL Server 2000 who > is having that fail consistently and repeatedly on one of their boxes > (they have another box running identical software on which it is not > failing, and on our box which we've one everythintg possible to make > identical it doesn't fail). I've done everything I can to find a > difference in setup between the boxes and so far I've failed. >
My slip. SQL Server doesn't understand SQL-92 TIMESTAMP '2003-02-22 23:34:43.123' at all, as in CAST(TIMESTAMP '2003-02-22 23:34:43.123' as DATETIME) but I doubt you are construction CAST(TIMESTAMP ... expressions. SQL Server uses {ts '1996-12-19 11:11:11.000'} to represent a timestamp literal, and interprets it unambiguously, as far as I know, as it does the date literal format of {d '1996-12-19'} Without the {ts ... }, these strings alone, like all numeric delimited date formats, when implicitely converted to dates follow the relative positions of d and m in the dateformat setting in effect implicit from the language selection or explicitly set. set dateformat dmy go declare @d datetime set @d = {ts '1996-12-19 11:11:11.000'} select @d go declare @d datetime set @d = {d '1996-12-19'} select @d go declare @d datetime set @d = '1996-12-19 11:11:11.000' select @d go declare @d datetime set @d = '1996-12-19' select @d I don't know why you would have trouble with this if the settings were right, but maybe there's some driver parameter buried in the registry, or some other setting that's not obvious. Perhaps someone wanted us_english but dmy, and got the bright idea of modifying the syslanguages table! Does that bum server error out on this?? set dateformat dmy declare @d datetime set @d = '2003-02-19' If the server is installed as us_english, and no one has changed the dateformat setting or modified syslanguages, I think it should work and might be a case for product support. On the other hand, I wouldn't want a product that depended on the language of installation. SK
ben_spam@mailcity.com (Ben McIntyre) writes: [quoted text, click to view] > Simon > > This may be useless, but you don't seem to have a lot SQL Server > 2000-specific info. > SQL server interprets data based on a 'collation' which is set at > install time, and can be overridden manually in an SQL statement. > To find the default collation for the database, the user will need to > right click on the SQL server instance in Enterprise Manager and > choose 'properties'. The default collation is displayed as part of > the basinc database information. > This can only be changed if the databases on the server are rebuilt. > Some information below from the SQL server 'man pages' > > I haven't had the problems you describe, but if there is a > configuration difference between two installs, which is causing the > problem you describe, this is likely to be it. > From what I understand, you are saying that one installation processes > the dates OK, and the other does not. So SQL Server 2000 will do the > job, it is just not configured correctly on one of the servers.
OK, thanks for that. The collation sequence on the database on our test box (which _does_ work) is SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. My customer isn't yet in this morning so I can't ring and check what his is. I'll post a resolution once I get it sorted in case anyone searches google any time in the future for a similar problem. Just so that, in future, I know the general solution, which 'bit' of the collation name is it which affects date sequencing? I mean, for example, if in future I have a similar problem with a customer not in the Latin1 area, what collation advice to I offer? Cheers Simon -- simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
[quoted text, click to view] > Just so that, in future, I know the general solution, which 'bit' of the > collation name is it which affects date sequencing?
You mean datetime datattype? That is not affected by collations at all. If this is your problem, you might want to post the problem at hand again (It has been "aged out"). -- Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver [quoted text, click to view] "Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message news:87n0dtot6r.fsf@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk... > ben_spam@mailcity.com (Ben McIntyre) writes: > > > Simon > > > > This may be useless, but you don't seem to have a lot SQL Server > > 2000-specific info. > > SQL server interprets data based on a 'collation' which is set at > > install time, and can be overridden manually in an SQL statement. > > To find the default collation for the database, the user will need to > > right click on the SQL server instance in Enterprise Manager and > > choose 'properties'. The default collation is displayed as part of > > the basinc database information. > > This can only be changed if the databases on the server are rebuilt. > > Some information below from the SQL server 'man pages' > > > > I haven't had the problems you describe, but if there is a > > configuration difference between two installs, which is causing the > > problem you describe, this is likely to be it. > > From what I understand, you are saying that one installation processes > > the dates OK, and the other does not. So SQL Server 2000 will do the > > job, it is just not configured correctly on one of the servers. > > OK, thanks for that. The collation sequence on the database on our > test box (which _does_ work) is SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. My > customer isn't yet in this morning so I can't ring and check what his > is. > > I'll post a resolution once I get it sorted in case anyone searches > google any time in the future for a similar problem. > > Just so that, in future, I know the general solution, which 'bit' of the > collation name is it which affects date sequencing? I mean, for > example, if in future I have a similar problem with a customer not in > the Latin1 area, what collation advice to I offer? > > Cheers > > Simon > > -- > simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ > > [ This mind intentionally left blank ]
Ben McIntyre (ben_spam@mailcity.com) writes: [quoted text, click to view] > SQL server interprets data based on a 'collation' which is set at > install time, and can be overridden manually in an SQL statement. > To find the default collation for the database, the user will need to > right click on the SQL server instance in Enterprise Manager and > choose 'properties'. The default collation is displayed as part of > the basinc database information.
Collation apply to string columns, not to datetime columns. The two commands that affect how strings is interpreted are SET DATEFORMAT and SET LANGUAGE. -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@algonet.se Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor.please_reply_to_public_forum.karaszi@cornerstone.se> writes: [quoted text, click to view] > > Just so that, in future, I know the general solution, which 'bit' of the > > collation name is it which affects date sequencing? > > You mean datetime datattype? That is not affected by collations at all. If this is your problem, you > might want to post the problem at hand again (It has been "aged out").
Ouch, I feared that. Briefly, I have a piece of cross-platform Java code which is used in production environments against at least five different database backends. Many installations use SQL Server and have been running reliably since 1998, and several installations use SQL Server 2000 with the com.microsoft.sqlserver.SqlServerDriver satisfactorily. Yesterday, one of our customers reported a problem and on investigation we found that their (new) installation wasn't accepting dates properly. It would not accept the date 28th August 2003 at all, and when (at my suggestion) they tried 4th August 2003, they got back 8th April 2003, which showed we had a date format problem. The code asks the database for the column type of each column and formats the data appropriately; because SQL Server doesn't support date fields it responds that the date/time fields which on other databases would be date fields are of type java.sql.Types.TIMESTAMP, and consequently my code formats them as ANSI 92 timestamp format, namely yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss.fffffffff As I say, we've got loads of SQL Server installations which are working quite happily with this. We've got exactly one which isn't. We haven't been able to reproduce the bug on our test machine. We haven't been able to identify any difference in configuration between the machine that doesn't work and ones which do. I'm very unwilling indeed to write special purpose code for different database backends as it will lead to maintenance problems (I know this, because we have one special purpose hack to work around an Oracle misfeature). I'd like to resolve this problem if I can by specifying the required SQL Server configuration. We've today sent the customer a patch which dumps and deletes the database and recreates it with the collation which we have on our test box but it sounds from what you are saying as though this is unlikely to work. Can you offer any other suggestions? Many thanks Simon, not much impressed by Microsoft at the best of times. -- simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
[microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup removed - can't send to two mail servers at once, unfortunately...] Simon, Can you see what DBCC USEROPTIONS returns on the connection that is failing? And if there are no differences from other servers, whether the syslanguages table has not been modified? SK [quoted text, click to view] Simon Brooke wrote: > "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor.please_reply_to_public_forum.karaszi@cornerstone.se> writes: > > >>>Just so that, in future, I know the general solution, which 'bit' of the >>>collation name is it which affects date sequencing? >> >>You mean datetime datattype? That is not affected by collations at all. If this is your problem, you >>might want to post the problem at hand again (It has been "aged out"). > > > Ouch, I feared that. > > Briefly, I have a piece of cross-platform Java code which is used in > production environments against at least five different database > backends. Many installations use SQL Server and have been running > reliably since 1998, and several installations use SQL Server 2000 > with the com.microsoft.sqlserver.SqlServerDriver satisfactorily. > > Yesterday, one of our customers reported a problem and on > investigation we found that their (new) installation wasn't accepting > dates properly. It would not accept the date 28th August 2003 at all, > and when (at my suggestion) they tried 4th August 2003, they got back > 8th April 2003, which showed we had a date format problem. > > The code asks the database for the column type of each column and > formats the data appropriately; because SQL Server doesn't support > date fields it responds that the date/time fields which on other > databases would be date fields are of type java.sql.Types.TIMESTAMP, > and consequently my code formats them as ANSI 92 timestamp format, > namely > > yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss.fffffffff > > As I say, we've got loads of SQL Server installations which are > working quite happily with this. We've got exactly one which isn't. We > haven't been able to reproduce the bug on our test machine. We haven't > been able to identify any difference in configuration between the > machine that doesn't work and ones which do. > > I'm very unwilling indeed to write special purpose code for different > database backends as it will lead to maintenance problems (I know this, > because we have one special purpose hack to work around an Oracle > misfeature). I'd like to resolve this problem if I can by specifying > the required SQL Server configuration. > > We've today sent the customer a patch which dumps and deletes the > database and recreates it with the collation which we have on our > test box but it sounds from what you are saying as though this is > unlikely to work. > > Can you offer any other suggestions? > > Many thanks > > Simon, not much impressed by Microsoft at the best of times. >
Hi, [quoted text, click to view] Simon Brooke wrote:
[...] [quoted text, click to view] > So how, for the love of God and Little Fishes, do I persuade a SQL > Server database to accept ANSI SQL 92 dates, permanently, not on a > per-session basis?
Back when I was a ASP programmer the way do deal with this was to format the date like "dd-MMM-yyyy", where "MMM" is the three-letter abbreviation of the month. This works because the Database understands how to read the dd-MMM-yyyy format. this behaviour is not particular to SQL Server, I just tried it in JDBC/PostgreSQL (don't have access to MSSQL right now) and it works also.... I would be surprised if it didn't worked in JDBC/MSSQL. CREATE TABLE public.tbl_test ( datefield date ) ; ********** JAVA ************* Connection c = getConnection(); PreparedStatement statement = c.prepareStatement("INSERT INTO tbl_test(datefield) VALUES (?)"); statement.setObject(1, "10-Sep-2003"); statement.execute(); statement.clearParameters(); statement.close(); ********************************** SELECT * FROM tbl_test; datefield ------------ 2003-09-10 (1 row) There is a catch though, you have to be carefull with what you write as "MMM", if the DB server is configured in other language other than English the month abbreviation must comply to that language. I hope this helps. Regards, Luis Neves
Simon Brooke (simon@jasmine.org.uk) writes: [quoted text, click to view] > The code asks the database for the column type of each column and > formats the data appropriately; because SQL Server doesn't support > date fields it responds that the date/time fields which on other > databases would be date fields are of type java.sql.Types.TIMESTAMP, > and consequently my code formats them as ANSI 92 timestamp format, > namely > > yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss.fffffffff > > As I say, we've got loads of SQL Server installations which are > working quite happily with this. We've got exactly one which isn't.
Which smells no bit of luck, given that you post with a UK address. Try this script: SET DATEFORMAT dmy SELECT convert(datetime, '2002-12-18 12:12:12.000') -- Fails go SET DATEFORMAT mdy SELECT convert(datetime, '2002-12-18 12:12:12.000') -- Passes go SET LANGUAGE British SELECT convert(datetime, '2002-12-18 12:12:12.000') -- Fails go SET LANGUAGE us_english SELECT convert(datetime, '2002-12-18 12:12:12.000') -- Passes go The dateformat setting is a pure run-time setting. However, changing language also changes the dateformat setting. And the language can be set by a default on a login with sp_defaultlanguage. Finally, there is a server configuration option that determines the default language for new logins. If your java app logs in with a certain login, you can probably mandate that the default language of this login should be one that has a dateformat of ymd or mdy, for instance Swedish. If you can't mandate the language, it seems that you need to adapt your app how much you hate it. I should add that this problem appears because you are sending down raw SQL statements to SQL Server, rather than parameterized queries or RPC calls to stored procedures. If you do this, the client library will handle the date format and pass SQL Server a binary value which is not subject to settings. Whether this is possible to do in Java, I have no idea, but client libraries such as ODBC and ADO supports it, so why not JDBC? -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@algonet.se Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
Steve Kass <skass@drew.edu> writes: [quoted text, click to view] > [microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup removed - can't send to two mail > servers at once, unfortunately...] > > Simon, > > Can you see what > > DBCC USEROPTIONS > > returns on the connection that is failing?
I'm sorry, how do I do this? I'm not by any means a SQL Server expert. I tried it in query analyzer and got: Server: Msg 2812, Level 16, State 62, Line 1 Could not find stored procedure 'sbcc' When I try it over the JDBC connection I get: DBCC USEROPTIONS SQL Error java.sql.SQLException: [Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC]No rows affected. DBCC USEROPTIONS; SQL Error java.sql.SQLException: [Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC]Syntax error at token 0, line 0 offset 0. [quoted text, click to view] > And if there are no > differences from other servers, whether the syslanguages table has not > been modified?
There does not appear to be syslanguages table in the database. There are plenty of other 'dbo.sysxxx' tables, but not syslanguages. This is SQL Server 2000. -- simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
[quoted text, click to view] "Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message news:878yp38qg1.fsf@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk... > Steve Kass <skass@drew.edu> writes: > > > [microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup removed - can't send to two mail > > servers at once, unfortunately...] > > > > Simon, > > > > Can you see what > > > > DBCC USEROPTIONS > > > > returns on the connection that is failing? > > I'm sorry, how do I do this? I'm not by any means a SQL Server > expert. I tried it in query analyzer and got: > > Server: Msg 2812, Level 16, State 62, Line 1 > Could not find stored procedure 'sbcc'
Umm, here is simply a typo. This will work in Query Analyzter.
Simon Brooke (simon@jasmine.org.uk) writes: [quoted text, click to view] > Steve Kass <skass@drew.edu> writes: >> [microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup removed - can't send to two mail >> servers at once, unfortunately...] >> >> Simon, >> >> Can you see what >> >> DBCC USEROPTIONS >> >> returns on the connection that is failing? > > I'm sorry, how do I do this? I'm not by any means a SQL Server > expert. I tried it in query analyzer and got: > > Server: Msg 2812, Level 16, State 62, Line 1 > Could not find stored procedure 'sbcc'
As Greg Strider pointed out, you gave a typo, and I don't want to be sarcastic or anything, but double-checking what you typed, before you ask for help, may increase your effectivenesss. [quoted text, click to view] > When I try it over the JDBC connection I get: > DBCC USEROPTIONS > SQL Error > java.sql.SQLException: [Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC]No rows > affected. > DBCC USEROPTIONS; > > SQL Error > java.sql.SQLException: [Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC]Syntax > error at token 0, line 0 offset 0.
Some DBCC commands produces their output as messages, which could confuse some drivers. However, USEROPTIONS always produce a result set. Maybe the JDBC driver is too smart for its own good and performs its own parsing, and don't recognize the command. Not knowing about JDBC I cannot really help. [quoted text, click to view] > There does not appear to be syslanguages table in the database. There > are plenty of other 'dbo.sysxxx' tables, but not syslanguages. This is > SQL Server 2000.
syslanguages is in master. I would hold it as unlikely that someone has changed syslanguages. In any case, I seem to recall that I tried to explained exactly what was going on a couple of days ago. Did you see that post? -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@algonet.se Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> writes: [quoted text, click to view] > Briefly, I have a piece of cross-platform Java code which is used in > production environments against at least five different database > backends. Many installations use SQL Server and have been running > reliably since 1998, and several installations use SQL Server 2000 > with the com.microsoft.sqlserver.SqlServerDriver satisfactorily. > > Yesterday, one of our customers reported a problem and on > investigation we found that their (new) installation wasn't accepting > dates properly. It would not accept the date 28th August 2003 at all, > and when (at my suggestion) they tried 4th August 2003, they got back > 8th April 2003, which showed we had a date format problem. > > The code asks the database for the column type of each column and > formats the data appropriately; because SQL Server doesn't support > date fields it responds that the date/time fields which on other > databases would be date fields are of type java.sql.Types.TIMESTAMP, > and consequently my code formats them as ANSI 92 timestamp format, > namely > > yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss.fffffffff > > As I say, we've got loads of SQL Server installations which are > working quite happily with this. We've got exactly one which isn't. We > haven't been able to reproduce the bug on our test machine. We haven't > been able to identify any difference in configuration between the > machine that doesn't work and ones which do.
OK, just for the record here is the resolution of this issue. What we found was that on the servers which worked, the user logins used by the application had language set to 'English', and not either 'US English' or 'British English'. We set the language on the server that didn't work to 'English', and it worked. Many thanks to everyone who helped! -- simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ Das Internet is nicht fuer gefingerclicken und giffengrabben... Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das mausklicken sichtseeren keepen das bandwit-spewin hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|