: Friday, November 22, 2002 11:40 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject:Re: Oracle is a time machine!!
Does it have any relation to year 1752 adjustment for leap year?
Try following on unix ..
cal 9 1752
September 1752
S M Tu W Th F S
1 2 14 15 16
17 18 19
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select to_char(the_date, 'mm/dd/') from test;
What do you get? :-))
Robert G. Freeman - Oracle OCP
Oracle Database Architect
CSX Midtier Database Administration
It must have converted the date to metric.
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:55 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select
cipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Oracle is a time machine!!
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:55:21 -0800
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select to_char(the_date, 'mm/dd/')
Very simple explanation. That day does not exist.
Prior to 1582, every year divisible by 4 was a leap year. Since a year
contains only 365.242199 days (slightly less than 365.25 days), an error of
ten days accumulated over the centuries. To compensate for this error, Pope
Gregory XIII (after whom
is a time machine!!
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select to_char(the_date, 'mm/dd/') from test;
What do you get? :-))
Robert G. Freeman - Oracle OCP
Oracle Database Architect
CSX Midtier
Does it have any relation to year 1752 adjustment for leap year?
Try following on unix ..
cal 9 1752
September 1752
S M Tu W Th F S
1 2 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
-Rachna
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL
strange, I get
TO_CHAR(TH
--
10/15/1582
and not 10/05/1582
mo
--- Freeman, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values
(to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select to_char(the_date, 'mm/dd/')
I get the same date for Oct 5 - 15 (10/15/02).
Good thing I don't deal with dates that far back. ;^)
--
Alan Davey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
212-604-0200 x106
On 11/22/2002 12:55 PM, Freeman, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert
TO_CHAR(TH
--
10/15/1582
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:55 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select to_char(the_date,
is a time machine!!
It must have converted the date to metric.
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:55 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582
Seems like the machine is frozen in time . . .
try the next day, too!
insert into test values (to_date('10-06-1582','mm-dd-') )
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:55 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table
in October, 1582. It was
called
the Gregorian Calendar Reform.
Mark Stahlke
Oracle DuhBA
Denver Newspaper Agency
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:55 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Oracle is a time machine!!
Don't believe me?? Try
Very tricky Robert. ;^)
Spoiler Alert below!!!
After some time to think about this, I did a quick search on Google and realized that
this is when the calendar changed from Julian to Gregorian.
--
Alan Davey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
212-604-0200 x106
On
For what I can recall, there was an adjustment in 1582 in the calendar to
make it fit with the reality. They introduced the leap years and the cut
10 days in october 1582. I think they went from october 4 to october 15.
At 10:19 2002-11-22 -0800, you wrote:
It must have converted the date to
okay, time to nip this discussion in the bud...
First of all, there are/were 2 calendar systems. The gregorian and the
juilan calendars. They both got out of synch with the seasons (due to no
leap year or something). They were both adjusted forward a number of days to
synch back up the real
removed 10 days from
the calendar to align with solar calendar...
check this out...
http://webexhibits.org/calendars/timeline.html
http://webexhibits.org/calendars/timeline.html
From: Freeman, Robert
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Oracle is a time
Perhaps this Gregorian thing is just a government cover-up for a giant alien
ship having stopped time for 14 days back then??
I think I've been watching to much X-Files. :-)
RF
Robert G. Freeman - Oracle OCP
Oracle Database Architect
CSX Midtier Database Administration
Author of several
I bet Goulet is old enough to remember when this happened.
He's probably still pissed off at missing a paycheck.
--Walt Weaver
Bozeman, Montana
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 11:19 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
I get the same date for Oct 5 - 15
ORACLE-L
Subject: Oracle is a time machine!!
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:55:21 -0800
Don't believe me?? Try this:
create table test(the_date date);
insert into test values (to_date('10-05-1582','mm-dd-') );
select to_char(the_date, 'mm/dd/') from test;
What do you get
is a time machine!!
Does it have any relation to year 1752 adjustment for leap year?
Try following on unix ..
cal 9 1752
September 1752
S M Tu W Th F S
1 2 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
-Rachna
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list
,
Mark Stahlke
Oracle DuhBA
Denver Newspaper Agency
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 11:40 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject:Re: Oracle is a time machine!!
Does it have any relation to year 1752 adjustment for leap year?
Try following
So that's how they implement flashback queries in 10i.
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
Author of:
Practical Oracle 8i: Building Efficient Databases
Next Seminar - Australia - July/August
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
Host to The Co-Operative Oracle Users' FAQ
Look carefully at the following (genuine) extract
from a 9.0.1.3 trace file, and examine the TIM=
entries:
PARSING IN CURSOR #2 len=210 dep=1 uid=0 oct=3 lid=0
tim=1019495629365212 hv=787810128 ad='6e0a278'
select /*+ rule */ bucket_cnt, row_cnt, cache_cnt, null_cnt,
timestamp#, sample_size,
Hello Jonathan,
isn't it soft parse (mis=0) ?
regards...
Jonathan Lewis wrote:
Look carefully at the following (genuine) extract
from a 9.0.1.3 trace file, and examine the TIM=
entries:
PARSING IN CURSOR #2 len=210 dep=1 uid=0 oct=3 lid=0
tim=1019495629365212 hv=787810128 ad='6e0a278'
select /*+
You mean a soft parse is allowed to finish before it starts ?
Or maybe it has to be a soft parse, by SYS, on a recursive
statement that uses the rule-based optimiser ;)
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
Author of:
Practical Oracle 8i: Building Efficient Databases
Next Seminar -
Do you have any more examples? and if so, is the
second time always suffixed with '00'. I'm wondering
if the concluding time is still centiseconds (or
whatever precision is appropriate to cause the
'problem')
Cheers
Connor
--- Jonathan Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Look carefully at the
Don't lose any sleep on it, but here's another:
PARSING IN CURSOR #1 len=40 dep=0 uid=54 oct=1 lid=54
tim=1019495629370923 hv=1851325355 ad='6cb3450'
alter table TESTLONG modify ( text clob)
END OF STMT
PARSE
#1:c=1,e=11122,p=1,cr=1,cu=0,mis=1,r=0,dep=0,og=4,tim=101949562937
0823
NB - not
Jonathan, beware, I *think* that the Time Travel Option (TTO) is licensed separately.
Stephane Faroult
Oriole Corporation
Performance Tools Free Scripts
--
http://www.oriole.com, designed by Oracle DBAs for Oracle DBAs
Hello Jonathan,
I always think twice while talking to a guru. Here is my comment for
your test case:
'tim' columns in these examples are not accurate.
PARSING IN CURSOR #1 len=40 dep=0 uid=54 oct=1 lid=54
tim=1019495629370923 hv=1851325355 ad='6cb3450'
alter table TESTLONG modify ( text clob)
LOL
Now, that is funny...
Robert G. Freeman
Author Oracle9i New Features by Oracle Press
Mastering Oracle8i By Sybex
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:15 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
light.
Jonathan, beware, I *think* that the Time Travel Option
to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Oracle invents time machine - optimizer now faster than light.
Look carefully at the following (genuine) extract
from a 9.0.1.3 trace file, and examine the TIM=
entries
--Boundary-00=_9KJR12S0
Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative;
boundary=Boundary-00=_9KJRBHK0
--Boundary-00=_9KJRBHK0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi List,=0D
33 matches
Mail list logo
