Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: sysdate display SQL 3.4 vs 8.0.5

RE: sysdate display SQL 3.4 vs 8.0.5

From: Tim Onions <>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 10:34:42 -0000
Message-Id: <>

I had a similar thing during y2k testing - below is a mail sent to me = by a
colleague, it may help.

I have spotted a small issue with y2k dates whereby server manager (and certain versions of SQLPlus) will lose trailing digits. It's all to do = with
the NLS_DATE_FORMAT set on the server in INIT.ORA or on the client's PC registry being longer that the default display width of date columns in = the
tools mentioned. Hence a date format of dd-mon-yyyy/value of = 01-jan-2000
will actually show up as 01-jan-20 if the display width of the tool is = set
to 9 - you get the idea.

Note that this is only a display formatting problem and the date itself = is
actually correctly stored in the database. It is easily fixed by = setting an
appropriate DATEWIDTH parameter. However, if anybody has scripts that = spool
out the date then these need to be checked especially if the spool = files are
used for further processing (eg recording details of last backup sets = etc).

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Rogers [] Sent: 13 December 2000 21:22
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: sysdate display SQL 3.4 vs 8.0.5

  We have a server running 7.3.4 and a client with SQL-PLUS ver 3.3.4 = and
ver 8.0.5 in it. When we select a date field from the same table using = the
different ver of SQL-PLUS the date field is 10 char on 3.3.3 and only 9 = char
on 8.0.5. example: select sysdate from dual; ver 3.3.4 displays 12-13-2000
ver 8.0.5 displays 12-13-200
I have checked the "show all" on both and I don't see a difference. Both of the glogin.sql files are identical. Does anyone have the answer... and 42 is not the on this time. ROR m=AA=BF=AAm


Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:

Author: Ron Rogers

San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

Original text of this message