SQL 6.5 and Y2K

Question

SQL 6.5 and Y2K

Henrico Bekker

One Orange Chip

Points: 27652
More actions
August 12, 2010 at 8:58 pm

#236656

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

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)

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

Ron McCullough SSC Guru Points: 63877 More actions · Answer 1

Boy oh boy did that make the old brain cells churn. Who would of thought this bit of ancient history would rise once again

If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked something.

Ron

Please help us, help you -before posting a question please read[/url]
Before posting a performance problem please read[/url]

malleswarareddy_m SSCertifiable Points: 5847 More actions · Answer 2

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)

sqljohn (twitter) SSC Enthusiast Points: 193 More actions · Answer 3

that one should have been filed under 'pointless', anyone still concerned with the Y2K compliance of version 6.5 has bigger issues

Ronald H SSCarpal Tunnel Points: 4053 More actions · Answer 4

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

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 5

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

vk-kirov SSCertifiable Points: 7686 More actions · Answer 6

The question forces to make an archaeological excavation 😀

Henrico Bekker One Orange Chip Points: 27652 More actions · Answer 7

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

tommyh SSCertifiable Points: 6302 More actions · Answer 8

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 😉

cengland0 SSCertifiable Points: 6102 More actions · Answer 9

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.

sjimmo SSChampion Points: 11139 More actions · Answer 10

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

Rose Bud Hall of Fame Points: 3147 More actions · Answer 11

Study the past if you would divine the future. ~Confucius

Toreador SSChampion Points: 11368 More actions · Answer 12

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 🙂

jeff.mason SSCrazy Eights Points: 9585 More actions · Answer 13

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.

SanjayAttray SSChampion Points: 13157 More actions · Answer 14

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.