SQL 6.5 and Y2K

  • 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

  • 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]

  • 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)

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

  • 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

  • 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

  • The question forces to make an archaeological excavation 😀

  • 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

  • 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 😉

  • 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.

  • 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

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

  • 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 🙂

  • 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.

  • 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