August 12, 2010 at 8:58 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item SQL 6.5 and Y2K
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thing is addressing problems that dont exist. Its solution-ism at its worst. We are dumbing down machines that are inherently superior. - Gilfoyle
August 12, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Boy oh boy did that make the old brain cells churn. Who would of thought this bit of ancient history would rise once again
August 12, 2010 at 10:55 pm
I did not any thing about SQL 6.5 ,7.0.Also i did little work on SQL server 2000.Worked mostly on 2005 and 2008.This question is almost ten years old.
Malleswarareddy
I.T.Analyst
MCITP(70-451)
August 13, 2010 at 12:45 am
that one should have been filed under 'pointless', anyone still concerned with the Y2K compliance of version 6.5 has bigger issues
August 13, 2010 at 12:57 am
I did the right guess! 🙂
10 Years ago I wasn't SQL Server aware, since then I upgraded myself a few times to what I am now...
Ronald HensbergenHelp us, help yourself... Post data so we can read and use it: http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/-------------------------------------------------------------------------2+2=5 for significant large values of 2
August 13, 2010 at 12:59 am
I actually remember this one. Thanks for the question. Would you believe that there are still some installs of 6.5 out there in the world?
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
August 13, 2010 at 1:38 am
The question forces to make an archaeological excavation 😀
August 13, 2010 at 2:19 am
Jason, I'm actually aware of a few places who are forced by legacy apps to run 6.5....and by the looks of this:
Correct answers: 38% (54)
Incorrect answers: 62% (89)
Total attempts: 143
not too many people were/are aware of the y2k issue on 6.5.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thing is addressing problems that dont exist. Its solution-ism at its worst. We are dumbing down machines that are inherently superior. - Gilfoyle
August 13, 2010 at 3:27 am
Henrico Bekker (8/13/2010)
Jason, I'm actually aware of a few places who are forced by legacy apps to run 6.5....and by the looks of this:Correct answers: 38% (54)
Incorrect answers: 62% (89)
Total attempts: 143
not too many people were/are aware of the y2k issue on 6.5.
Which really doesnt matter. Because if your where to get any problems because of this you would already have gotten them.
And no i dont know if there where some patches needed for Windows 95/98 to make them Y2K compatible as well either.
Do i care... no.
Is it important... no.
Is it fun... no.
Is it relevant... no.
Did i learn something... no.
Valuable leason... no.
Waste of time... yes.
Is writing this replay pointless... yes.
Is it Friday... YES 😀
And by that note ur forgiven 😉
August 13, 2010 at 3:43 am
Although I did get the answer right, I had to pick the closest response to the correct answer.
Technically, it was version 6.50.339 that fixed the Y2K issue. Then, Service Pack 5 came out (version 6.50.415) which was defective and you shouldn't have used it. Then, Service Pack 5a (version 6.50.416) released.
So, you could have fixed the Y2K problem before the release of SP5a if you installed the "Y2K" hot fix to the 6.50.281 (SP4) or 6.50.297 versions.
August 13, 2010 at 5:19 am
Had to really dig through the cob webs on this one. Great piece of trivia:rolleyes:
Steve Jimmo
Sr DBA
“If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
August 13, 2010 at 6:59 am
Study the past if you would divine the future. ~Confucius
August 13, 2010 at 7:21 am
wware (8/13/2010)
Study the past if you would divine the future. ~Confucius
Good point.
I'll bookmark this page in readiness for 2100 🙂
August 13, 2010 at 7:34 am
Come on -- historical questions can be fun, even if they don't mean anything about today's environment!
And good lord, I got it right because I did have to deal with that once upon a time. Supported an app that needed Y2K upgrades in those days, so I pretty much memorized all of the core MS Y2K stuff for things like Office and SQL Server that I interacted with.
August 13, 2010 at 8:29 am
I still had one production server which is still running on 6.5 version and one on 7.0 version. Still, HR dept. wants to keep their data in 6.5 only.
I call it Jewel in the Crown as its one between 29 servers on 2005 and 6 on 2008 version.;-)
SQL DBA.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply