RE: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-31 Thread Daevid Vincent
> From: Daevid Vincent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 6:09 PM > To: 'MySQL General' > Cc: 'Chris' > Subject: RE: BUG: DATE_ADD 9 fails, but works. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-28 Thread Kirk Friggstad
On 8/27/07, Daevid Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fortune 500 companies You mean in 21 years from now, all this will > just fail miserably because of some obscure 2038 limitation? This is Y2K > all over again -- unless mySQL fixes this bug. Obscure? Not really - lots of software is going

Re: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-27 Thread Paul DuBois
At 5:44 PM -0700 8/27/07, Chris wrote: I don't think this is a bug. I think what's happening is that your timestamp column can't hold that date, it's max value is somewhere in 2038. So I guess either change your timestamp column to a datetime column, or prevent users from putting invalid da

RE: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-27 Thread Daevid Vincent
> -Original Message- > From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 5:45 PM > > I don't think this is a bug. I think what's happening is that your > timestamp column can't hold that date, it's max value is > somewhere in 2038. You appear to be correct, burried i

Re: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-27 Thread Chris
I don't think this is a bug. I think what's happening is that your timestamp column can't hold that date, it's max value is somewhere in 2038. So I guess either change your timestamp column to a datetime column, or prevent users from putting invalid data in. Daevid Vincent wrote: using

RE: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-27 Thread Daevid Vincent
> -Original Message- > From: Paul DuBois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 5:04 PM > To: Daevid Vincent; 'MySQL General' > Subject: Re: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but works. > > At 4:56 PM -0700 8/27/07, Daevid Vincent wrote:

Re: BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-27 Thread Paul DuBois
At 4:56 PM -0700 8/27/07, Daevid Vincent wrote: using 9 as the DATE_ADD interval value will result in 000-00-00 but one less 9 will work. root# mysql --version mysql Ver 14.12 Distrib 5.0.41, for pc-linux-gnu (i686) using EditLine wrapper CREATE TABLE `Users` ( `CoreID` int(10) unsi

BUG: DATE_ADD 99999 fails, but 9999 works.

2007-08-27 Thread Daevid Vincent
using 9 as the DATE_ADD interval value will result in 000-00-00 but one less 9 will work. root# mysql --version mysql Ver 14.12 Distrib 5.0.41, for pc-linux-gnu (i686) using EditLine wrapper CREATE TABLE `Users` ( `CoreID` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, `Username`