Subject | Re: Problem in TIB_Query and currency... |
---|---|

Author | jocelyndionne@uraeus.qc.ca |

Post date | 2001-02-07T02:52:39Z |

Hi Helen. :-)

First of all, it's obvious that if I entered 25142356.23, I should

have written that the result is: 2.514E7. Sorry for the error. :-(

But, to be honest, 25 millions is not such a big number. ;-)

I'm using IB6, dialect 3 on NT. And yes, I have created a field

numeric(18,4) for this test. Can you explain how the precision and

scale work, please. I always thought that the precision was the

total number of digits and the scale was the number of digits after

the decimal point - maybe too much of RPG on the AS/400 ;-). So, if

I have 18 digits with a scale of 4, I will get a field with 14 digits

before the decimal point. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I have the same result in a TIB_Grid or a TIB_Edit.

Thanks.

Jocelyn Dionne.

First of all, it's obvious that if I entered 25142356.23, I should

have written that the result is: 2.514E7. Sorry for the error. :-(

But, to be honest, 25 millions is not such a big number. ;-)

I'm using IB6, dialect 3 on NT. And yes, I have created a field

numeric(18,4) for this test. Can you explain how the precision and

scale work, please. I always thought that the precision was the

total number of digits and the scale was the number of digits after

the decimal point - maybe too much of RPG on the AS/400 ;-). So, if

I have 18 digits with a scale of 4, I will get a field with 14 digits

before the decimal point. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I have the same result in a TIB_Grid or a TIB_Edit.

Thanks.

Jocelyn Dionne.

--- In IBObjects@y..., Helen Borrie <helebor@w...> wrote:

> At 01:37 AM 07-02-01 +0000, you wrote:

> >Hello Helen.

> >

> >The first time it happened, I was using a 'numeric(11,2)' field. I

> >changed the precision and it did not change anything. So I changed

> >it to double precision because I thought it was a precision

problem.

> >

> >Just to be sure, I did what you told in your post. I defined a

> >numeric(11,4) field. I entered 25142356.23 in the field. Look at

> >the result: 2514E7.

>

> That would be correct for such a number.

>

> >Same with a numeric(11,2) and numeric(14,2) and

> >numeric(18,4).

>

>

> >Anyway, if it's what you think it is, I would have the same

behaviour

> >in TIBOQuery, but I don't. In TIBOQuery, it's Ok. And it's Ok

with

> >all these different field definitions.

>

> What version of IB are you using? (14,4) would be the maximum

precision

> you could get with 64-bit (v. 6, dialect 3).

> But this helps, I think. If it's working with IBOQuery and not

with

> IB_Query, it could be a problem in the IB_Datalink, the treatment

of

> variants as Int64, or the control itself. What control are you

using to

> display it? Are you seeing the same output in both IB_Edit and

IB_Grid?

>

>

>

> >I think the problem is of another kind.

>

>

> No answers yet...but it looks as if some facts are shaking out. :))

>

>

> Helen

>

>

> All for Open and Open for All

> InterBase Developer Initiative ยท http://www.interbase2000.org

> _______________________________________________________