Apr 5, 2004
Hi,
Recently, I found a bug in Microsoft's official SQL Server2000 JDBC driver.
It seemed to lie in the Statement's setDate() method. Maybe they simply assumed
all date are represented in 12-hours format.
The test code is below:
public void testMisc() throws Exception {
Connection conn = TransactionManager.getConnection();
String sql = "select count(salescheck0_.ID) as x0_0_ " +
"from T_CHK_OUT_BILL_TEST salescheck0_ " +
"where (salescheck0_.EX_TIME>?)" +
"and(salescheck0_.EX_TIME<?)";
PreparedStatement stmt = conn.prepareCall(sql);
SimpleDateFormat sdf = new SimpleDateFormat("yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss");
Date timefrom = sdf.parse("2004-04-02 00:00:00.000");
Date timeto = sdf.parse("2004-04-02 23:00:00.000");
stmt.setDate(1, new java.sql.Date(timefrom.getTime()));
stmt.setDate(2, new java.sql.Date(timeto.getTime()));
// stmt.setString(1, "2004-04-02 00:00:00.000" );
// stmt.setString(2, "2004-04-02 23:59:59.000" );
ResultSet rs = stmt.executeQuery();
if(rs.next()) {
int count = rs.getInt(1);
System.out.println("count = " + count);
}
}
The test data is following:
ID, SO_ID,WH_ID,CLIENT_ID,CODE,OPERATOR,CHK_OUT_TIME, STATUS,CREATE_TIME,DELIVER_TYPE
86179,67521,1,661,SLCCK200404020016,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:15,20,2004-4-2 9:40,10
86229,67566,1,118,SLCCK200404020066,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86231,67568,1,130,SLCCK200404020068,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86232,67569,1,134,SLCCK200404020069,xuyili,2004-4-2 11:08,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86233,67571,1,151,SLCCK200404020070,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86234,67572,1,55,SLCCK200404020071,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86235,67573,1,71,SLCCK200404020072,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86252,67590,1,298,SLCCK200404020089,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:33,20,2004-4-2 9:41,10
86268,67576,1,25,SLCCK200404020105,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 10:18,10
86269,67588,1,271,SLCCK200404020106,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:33,20,2004-4-2 10:20,10
86270,67506,1,42,SLCCK200404020107,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:15,20,2004-4-2 10:21,10
86271,67531,1,751,SLCCK200404020108,xuyili,2004-4-2 11:28,20,2004-4-2 10:22,10
86272,67570,1,149,SLCCK200404020109,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:23,20,2004-4-2 10:29,10
86273,67600,1,6,SLCCK200404020110,xuwei,2004-4-2 12:15,20,2004-4-2 10:40,10
86373,67665,3,686,SLCCK200404020210,root,2004-4-2 17:18,20,2004-4-2 16:32,10
86374,67657,3,883,SLCCK200404020211,root,2004-4-2 17:18,20,2004-4-2 16:32,10
86375,67666,3,686,SLCCK200404020212,root,2004-4-2 17:18,20,2004-4-2 16:32,10
86376,54799,1,395,SLCCK200404020213,zhouliyi,2004-4-2 19:52,20,2004-4-2 19:51,10
86377,55383,1,341,SLCCK200404020214,zhoulingyi,200 4-4-2 19:52,20,2004-4-2 19:51,10
Given the code and data, the expected output ought to be "count = 19"
But it's "count = 19" instead.
However, if you set date by using alternative method like the commented statements,
you can get the correct result.
Does anybody know if there exists any patch?
Could we expect Mircosoft to fix this bug? If so, where could I submit this bug report?
Regards,
Justin
View 3 Replies
View Related
