The 7.29.c8 should not be considered y2k compliant.

The problem COGNOS has it that it must wait for the modification to the Binary
Calendar date to take affect. The 7.29. x versions have been available for
sometime with the date fix only scheduled for patch 4 of MPEiX 5.5. A patch
that
is now being released and I am not certain that the date fix has been included.

The problem is that the COGNOS date functions 'use' the Calendar date intrinsic
format for their own date conversions. You can see this by writing a FORTRAN or
C
program or other language that perform the necessary bit manipulations and
compare
this value to the usual COGNOS dates they are the same.

At least they were on 7.29.c7, c6, c3, and others.

Thats the bad new the good is that there is supposed to be a version 8
available
either now or soon. This should be close or compliant if you have implemented
Power Patch 4.

In regards to PDL versus QDDR's. They take a little bit more to setup and your
existing script file is close to the PDL requirements, but you will never want
to
go back.

The use of PDL's is more flexible, especially in a development environment
where
you can create multiple PDL's and switch between them. It's like the old
classic
days versus the MPEiX days comparing SL's to XL's.

If you have any more questions or need further assistance please contact me.

Thomas G. Cook

DBA


Paul Christensen wrote:

> The Major Manufacturing Monstrosity that I contract at has been tossing
around
> the ideas of what
> Cognos version we must be on for Y2K compliance.
> It has now been dicatated that we must go to Powerhouse 7.29.C8 or we will
not
> be compliant.
> And in addition, we must convert from using QDDR and Dictionary/3000 to PDL.
>
> What are others on this list doing with Powerhouse versions?   Is going to
PDL
> a big deal, or not?
> Are there any problems with upgrading versions - such as features that no
> longer work or code that
> does not act the same way?
>
> All of the manufacturing sites, that I have contact with are still using
QDDR,
> yet Cognos says that
> less than 1/2% of their customers use it.  Are we the only firm still using
> QDDR?
>
> And as a sidebar, if Dictionary/3000 is not going to be Y2K compliant, what
is
> Transact/Inform going to
> use as a dictionary?
>
> Paul D. Christensen
> PC Enterprises Inc.
> Osakis MN
>
> [log in to unmask]    or [log in to unmask]