|
Thanks Birgitta, adding the DatFmt = *ISO to my set option statement fixed my problem. I've never had to set this option before but, until recently, I've only used DDS created tables. I'm assuming this is standard practice when using SQL created tables? Kind regards, Brian On 9/28/06, Hauser, Birgitta <Birgitta.Hauser@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi, 1. STRSQL: Change the date format over F13 Option 1 DATFMT to either *ISO, *EUR or *USA and you'll see all dates and no +++++++++++ 2. Embedded SQL: Add an Set Option statement to set the date format used by the precompiler to either *ISO, *EUR or *USA and you'll see, you program works. Provided your host variable in RPG is defined with a date format with a 4 digit year: C/EXEC SQL Set Option DatFmt = *ISO C/END-EXEC Mit freundlichen Grüßen i.A. Birgitta Hauser LUNZER + PARTNER GMBH Consulting | Software | Service Carl-Zeiss-Straße 1 63755 Alzenau Tel: + 49 6023 951-255 Fax: + 49 6023 951-111 Internet. www.lp-gmbh.com www.rpg-schulung.de -------------------------------------------------------- Handelsregister: Aschaffenburg HRB 4720 Gerichtsstand und Erfüllungsort Alzenau Ust-IdNr.: DE132093146 Geschäftsführer: Rudolf Gerbert --------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brian Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 16:26 To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: SQL - Data mapping error on member XXXXXX. I've got several vendor-supplied tables containing date fields that are generating "Data mapping error on member XXXXXX" error messages. Looking at the file definition in iNav shows that these date fields are defined as not null capable and viewing the contents of the table in iNav shows the value for these fields as 0001-01-01. Displaying the table with STRSQL shows the values for these date fields as ++++++++. When I try to read these tables into my RPG program using embedded SQL I get SQLSTT = 22007. How can I go about initializing these date fields so that these records can be processed? Updating them with a value of 1900-01-01 and then back to 0001-01-01 did not solve the problem. Kind regards, Brian -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.