Carlos,
Thanks for your quick response and help. What is happening is
that=20
Firebird *does* return the correct Date and Time but only up to the
second. The milliseconds value is missing from the date returned from
the database and thus you cannot assume *absolute* DateTime equality for
use in DateTime.CompareTo.
Since all I need is hh:mm:ss precision then what I have to do to
work around this issue is to specifically check hours, minute and
seconds rather than default to the tick counts until you've implemented
milliseconds support in V1.6
Thanks,
Chris.
-----Original Message-----
From: fir...@li...
[mailto:fir...@li...] On Behalf Of
ch...@co...
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 1:40 PM
To: Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lvarez
Cc: 'Firebird ADO.NET Data Provider'
Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] DateTime conversion in Firebird.NET
I don't have the code in front of me to refer to right now but I do
believe that I am using timestamp albeit as a domain -- don't know if
that makes a difference. This allowed be to verify my table layout with
sqlserver since domains can be used like #defines.
I'll take a closer look later this evening but I'm quite certain that
I'm using timestamp. I can verify whether the timestamp from my
datetime is getting into the data base correctly -- I believe it is but
pulling it out is where I am seeing the discrepancy.
I'll let you know later when I can look at stuff and provide you with
further information.
Thanks for your quick reply and excellent work on the provider and for
open source.
Chris
> Hello:
>=20
> >I using version 1.5 of Firebird.NET provider and I noticed that
DateTime
> >does not convert 100% therefore failing if used in CompareTo. What I
> >noticed is that the time portion of the datetime is missing as
indicated
> >by the ticks count. For example ....
> >
> >Write to Firebird=20
> >EntryDate {4/27/2004} System.DateTime =3D=3D> ticks =3D=3D>
> >632186542302487500
> >
> >Read from Firebird
> >EntryDate {4/27/2004} System.DateTime =3D=3D> ticks =3D=3D>
> >632186542300000000
> >
>=20
> That works for me, are you sure the field in the database is
> a timestamp field ?? ( i know it's stupid question but i need
> to ask it :) ), date only fields doesn't have the time ;).
>=20
> The only part that isn't handled in 1.5 version for a timestamp
> field are the milliseconds (that is being done yet in 1.6)
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --
> Best regards
>=20
> Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lvarez
> Vigo-Spain
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.
Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick
_______________________________________________
Firebird-net-provider mailing list
Fir...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
|
