What I usually do is something like the following:
public java.util.Date getJavaDate(java.sql.Timestamp timestamp) {
if (timestamp == null) {
return null;
} else {
long s = timestamp.getTime();
long ms = timestamp.getNanos() / 1000000;
return new java.util.Date(s + ms);
}
}
Eddie wrote:
> Thanks Frederik,
>
> But what I don't understand is why Date only contains the second part and
> not the millisecond part and when it does ? That is, when I create a Date
> object and print the millisecond part with the getTime() method, I do see
> the millisecond part but when I receive something from the database, the
> millisecond part is zero. Does this mean that is only zero when the date
> field is handled by the JDBC part ??
>
> Eddie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fredrik Lindgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Orion-Interest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 6:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Date conversion problem ??
>
>
>
>>You are right that is not the JDBC driver that makes this happen. It is
>>JDBC itself. java.sql.Timestamp is a subclass of java.util.Date but it
>>returns the integral seconds when calling getTime(). It supports nano
>>second precision with the getNanos() method.
>>
>>The javadoc includes this note:
>>Note: This type is a composite of a java.util.Date and a separate
>>nanoseconds value. Only integral seconds are stored in the
>>java.util.Date component. The fractional seconds - the nanos - are
>>separate. The getTime method will return only integral seconds. If a
>>time value that includes the fractional seconds is desired, you must
>>convert nanos to milliseconds (nanos/1000000) and add this to the
>>getTime value. The Timestamp.equals(Object) method never returns true
>>when passed a value of type java.util.Date because the nanos component
>>of a date is unknown. As a result, the Timestamp.equals(Object) method
>>is not symmetric with respect to the java.util.Date.equals(Object)
>>method. Also, the hashcode method uses the underlying java.util.Date
>>implementation and therefore does not include nanos in its computation.
>>
>> Due to the differences between the Timestamp class and the
>>java.util.Date class mentioned above, it is recommended that code not
>>view Timestamp values generically as an instance of java.util.Date. The
>>inheritance relationship between Timestamp and java.util.Date really
>>denotes implementation inheritance, and not type inheritance.
>>
>>I hope this helped
>>
>>/Fredrik Lindgren
>>
>>Ed Bras wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hellu,
>>>
>>>I retrieve a datetime field from the Ms SQL server. With a win sql
>>>
> client I
>
>>>see:
>>>2001-10-03 19:33:10.257
>>>
>>>When I print the field in an EJB (I use CMP) the millisecond part is
>>>
> zero
>
>>>!!!:
>>>Wed Oct 03 19:33:10 GMT+02:00 2001
>>>In milliseconds: 1002130390000
>>>
>>>I had the same problem with the Postgres driver so I don't think it is
>>>
> the
>
>>>JDBC driver (Opta driver of i-net)
>>>
>>>Has anyone any idea what is happening and how I can solve this ??
>>>Hope to get an answer, otherwise I have to convert the datetime fields
>>>
> in
>
>>>the database to a long to store it in milliseconds, which isn't very
>>>
> elegant
>
>>>I think !?
>>>
>>>Eddie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
