Re: DDS Time vs. DDL Time

[Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:06 PM, CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   The DDL supports a concept of "without default" whereas DDS does not,
> and DDS supports a specific TIMFMT() and TIMSEP() whereas DDL does not.
>  However neither of those should be relevant to the above as far as I
> can infer; the *ISO time format [hh.mm.ss] being used should be
> compatible irrespective of any TIMFMT given the activity is SQL versus
> RLA, and given that an actual value is specified for the I\O there
> should be no issue for a NULL value being restricted.

You'd think ISO format would work...but at least with the JDBC driver
I've been bit in the past by the system returning ISO formatted dates
when the toolbox defaulted to MDY...

It took fixes in both JT400 and the OS to get things to play nice..
http://www-912.ibm.com/j_dir/JTOpen.nsf/8178b1c14b1e9b6b8525624f0062fe9f/724A5B9B43AEC7EC862575770009AAAE?OpenDocument

So it might be worthwhile to confirm that everything
matches...particularly if the OP is at v5r4...

Charles