New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Different Date/DateTime Handling between FB 2.0 and FB 2.5 [CORE5178] #5459
Comments
Modified by: Michael Beilharz (mbeilharz)description: in FB 2.0 Date/DateTIme datas less than 1.1.100 are accepted (there is no sense behind it, but FB 2.0 accept such dates), the porblem is, when you read a record with such a date/datetime column, an exception appears "value exceeds the range for valid timestamp". thank you for answering and your help regards => in FB 2.0 Date/DateTIme datas less than 1.1.100 are accepted (there is no sense behind it, but FB 2.0 accept such dates), the porblem is, when you read a record with such a date/datetime column by using an FB 2.5.x, an exception appears "value exceeds the range for valid timestamp". thank you for answering and your help regards |
Commented by: @dyemanov No, you cannot turn it off. To troubleshoot impossible gbak's restore, see here: http://paulbeachsblog.blogspot.ru/2011/07/firebird-v21-error-value-exceeds-range.html |
Modified by: @dyemanovsecurity: Developers [ 10012 ] => |
Commented by: Michael Beilharz (mbeilharz) thanks for your immediate help |
Submitted by: Michael Beilharz (mbeilharz)
Is related to CORE1714
in FB 2.0 Date/DateTIme datas less than 1.1.100 are accepted (there is no sense behind it, but FB 2.0 accept such dates), the porblem is, when you read a record with such a date/datetime column by using an FB 2.5.x, an exception appears "value exceeds the range for valid timestamp".
my question: is there an option or a flag in FB 2.5.x (firebird.conf) to start the FB 2.5.x server by ignoring datas which exceeds the range, so that the FB 2.5.x works in that context as an FB 2.0 ?
thank you for answering and your help
regards
michael
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: