2 Replies Latest reply: May 15, 2014 9:58 AM by joey RSS

    Time Stamp in a Date/Time field

    joey

      I have a time stamp that Monarch stores as a Date/Time type and Time format.  I believe that Monarch adds this time to the current date.

       

      When I export the data to an Access database the date portion of the field contains the date of the export (for example Dec 14, 2005).  However, when I type the timestamp directly into the Access table the date portion of the field is Dec 30, 1899.

       

      Is there a way to export only the time portion of the field? Or, is there a way to export the same date every time the data is exported?

       

      Thanks.

        • Time Stamp in a Date/Time field
          Grant Perkins

          Joey,

           

          I created a small text file with some times listed, read this with Monarch. Created a Monarch table and exported the result to MS Access (Access 2000) and the Access table shows the fields as Date/Time fields displaying the time but no date.

           

          This seems to be different to your results.

           

          I'm using Monarch 8.01 with Windows XP Home. It may be that there are some differences in different versions so I think we should establish what you are using first so that we are looking at the same configuration as far as possible in case that is significant.

           

          Grant

          • Time Stamp in a Date/Time field
            joey

            Grant,

            Your test was very helpful.  There actually is a date stored when you perform this test but it is the correct zero date (12/20/1899).  You need to format the field to always display the date.

             

            This issue arose because I am reading off a DB2 table.  DB2 has three data types: Time, Date, and Date/Time.  Access only has one: Date/Time.  It appears that a part of the ODBC path from the PC to DB2 inserts the current date for Time fields.  I linked the table in Access that I was trying to replicate and noticed the same behavior. 

             

            I'll direct this issue to the provider of the ODBC driver.

             

            Thanks for your help!