Re: MySQL, PHP or ghost?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Peter, et al --

...and then Peter Beckman said...
% 
% On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, David T-G wrote:
% 
% > Looks like it, though I admit that the manual doesn't adequately explain
% > your results.  Check out section 6.2.2.4 for details.
% 
%  I did; see my previous (moments ago) email on my read on that manual
%  section.

Ah; I will when it comes through :-)


% 
% > % So my assumption is that if I insert with year="" it should use the
% > % default.  Or at least 0000.
% >
% > That makes sense.  And so what is the default?  Looks like it is, for
% > some reason, 2000.  [This isn't a TIMESTAMP field, so we don't
% > necessarily expect it to be "this year".]
% 
%  The default at the time was 0000.

At the time of the mysql release, you might mean?  Certainly at the time
of the manual writing...


% 
...
% > Looks like it's standard mysql behavior:
% 
%  But that's what I'm questioning.  Should it be that way?  If so, the
%  manual page for YEAR should be altered.  If it shouldn't work that way, it
%  should be submitted as a bug.

Makes sense.  Having removed all php elements, you'd probably get a
better answer on the mysql list.


HTH & HAND & Good luck!

:-D
-- 
David T-G                      * There is too much animal courage in 
(play) davidtg@justpickone.org * society and not sufficient moral courage.
(work) davidtgwork@justpickone.org  -- Mary Baker Eddy, "Science and Health"
http://justpickone.org/davidtg/      Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!

Attachment: pgp00058.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [PHP Home]     [PHP Users]     [Postgresql Discussion]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Postgresql]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux