Bah, no comment on Microsofts reliability :)
But Oracle I have used extensively 7.x versions. I implicitly trust its
reliability...except I heard of some probs with version 8 when it came out
:) Cant imagine someone using the same version of the database for 35 years
tho. By that time you would have upgraded I would imagine. And Oracle
upgrades its data types with no probs...
----- Original Message -----
From: <davidb@vectormath.com>
To: <pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 9:51 PM
Subject: [GENERAL] Re: Is PostgreSQL ready for ...
> emergency personnel tracking database on an offshore oil rig). I've
managed
> the development of an entire application based on Y2K compliant Oracle
only
> to find out that it's only Y2K compliant if you enclose EVERY SINGLE
F***ING
> READ
> AND WRITE in a goofy-ass "FORMAT" statement. Although, if you don't use
the
> FORMAT statement, it will still accept four digit year entries without
> barking, and it will also display four digit years based on the two digit
> year it actually stores (so I guess if you never know the difference, what
> does it matter, right?). By the way, even if you use the Format
statement,
> Oracle still craps out after 2035. (that application was a safety