I've been stumbling with this issue for a couple days now, and cannot seem to figure out why, when my getdate() insert into the columns are providing a millisecond decimal to the military time format, I still cannot seem to be able to pull a decimal format datediff() result. Does it have to do with the engine not recognizing the decimal due to the surrounding '' characters?
When I use:
select datediff(s,'2013-06-01 21:59:59.141','2013-06-01 23:59:59.997')
It returns:
7200
And when I use:
select cast(datediff(s,'2013-06-01 21:59:59.141','2013-06-01 23:59:59.997') as float);
It returns:
7200
I am at a loss as to what I am missing in order to result in a decimal value.
Thanks
If you are trying to get the milliseconds of the difference, and you want to convert the units to seconds, you can try using something like the following:
SELECT DATEDIFF(MS,'2013-06-01 21:59:59.141','2013-06-01 23:59:59.997') / 1000.0
That'll produce: 7200.856000.
Please note that DATEDIFF(MS, ...) requires guarding for long time spans or it will give an overflow:
SELECT datediff(MS, '2013-06-30 23:59:59.997', '2013-06-01 21:59:59.141')
-- FAILURE: The datediff function resulted in an overflow. The number of dateparts separating two date/time instances is too large
You can use following method which is overflow-safe and gives you a float result:
SELECT cast(cast('2013-06-01 23:59:59.997' as datetime)-cast('2013-06-01 21:59:59.141' as datetime) as float) * 24.0
-- Returned 2.00023796296296
SELECT cast(cast('2013-06-30 23:59:59.997' as datetime)-cast('2013-06-01 21:59:59.141' as datetime) as float) * 24.0
-- Returned 698.000237962963
I'm not sure how this method works when time zone changed during the measured date period.
I have some SQL to convert javascript dates to SQL dates which works great. However, I've encoutered some data which is too large and is causing an exception:
Arithmetic overflow error converting expression to data type int
Here is the SQL in question:
DATEADD(MILLISECOND, cast(569337307200000 as bigint) % 1000, DATEADD(SECOND, cast(569337307200000 as bigint) / 1000, '19700101'))
I am running this on SQL Server 2008.
Just do the problematic DATEADD in two steps, starting with a coarser time unit (seconds, minutes, hours etc.), then dropping back to the fine grained one for the remainder.
Avoid going to the level of weeks and months though as that would require actual calendar calculations and we would prefer the system to handle that.
Example below needs to calculate a start time given a (possibly) large current duration in milliseconds.
-- large durations can overflow the integer argument needed for DATEADD
-- so do as two steps subtracting minutes (60000ms) and then remaining milliseconds.
DATEADD(ms, -large_duration_ms%60000, DATEADD(minute, -large_duration_ms/60000, GETDATE()))
One way I got around the Integer overflow issue was to subtract a more recent date from the microtime unix time stamp.
DATEADD(s, (CreationTimeStamp/1000-1384128000), '2013-11-11') AS CreateDate,
This will not fix the OP's problem because they will still overflow the max on the date column.
According to MSDN, in DATEADD (datepart , number , date )
number is an expression that can be resolved to an int that is added
to a datepart of date. User-defined variables are valid. If you
specify a value with a decimal fraction, the fraction is truncated and
not rounded.
Also notice that even if you give number as an integer, depending on your date & datepart, it could overflow the max range of the date which is 31-12-9999 for sql server 2008
Number has to be an integer. Here is a Test Demo
I had the same problem and I wanted to be meet the datetime range of mssql
Minimun datetime: 1753-01-01 00:00:00.000 (-6847804800)
Maximum datetime: 9999-12-31 23:59:59.997 (253402300799)
To achieve this the only solution I found was to loop to use DATEADD with int range values.
So based on this answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/2904294/687490
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.fn_ConvertToBigDateTime (#Datetime BIGINT)
RETURNS DATETIME
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #result datetime = Convert(datetime, '01/01/1970');
DECLARE #LocalTimeOffset BIGINT
,#AdjustedLocalDatetime BIGINT
,#MinIntValue INT
,#MaxIntValue INT
,#RemainingSeconds BIGINT;
-- define int limit
SET #MinIntValue = -2147483648;
SET #MaxIntValue = 2147483647;
-- compute the datetime with the offset
SET #LocalTimeOffset = DATEDIFF(second,GETDATE(),GETUTCDATE())
SET #AdjustedLocalDatetime = #Datetime - #LocalTimeOffset
-- going to the future
WHILE(#AdjustedLocalDatetime>#MaxIntValue)
BEGIN
SET #AdjustedLocalDatetime = #AdjustedLocalDatetime - #MaxIntValue;
SELECT #result = Convert(datetime, dateadd(ss, #MaxIntValue,#result));
END
-- going back in the past
WHILE(#AdjustedLocalDatetime<#MinIntValue)
BEGIN
SET #AdjustedLocalDatetime = #AdjustedLocalDatetime - #MinIntValue;
SELECT #result = Convert(datetime, dateadd(ss, #MinIntValue,#result));
END
RETURN (SELECT DATEADD(second,#AdjustedLocalDatetime, #result))
END;
You can then test the function with :
select dbo.fn_ConvertToBigDateTime(-6847804800) as 'min datetime',
dbo.fn_ConvertToBigDateTime(253402300799) as 'max datetime'
Hope it will help.
You can try converting the millis to days, add the days to beginning of EPOCH, and add the ms part to the date at the end. The problem is that you were trying to convert millis to seconds, which can still be too large number for INT for larger dates.
DATEADD(MILLISECOND,
CAST(myLongDateMs AS BIGINT) % 86400000,
DATEADD(day,
CAST(myLongDateMs AS BIGINT) / 86400000,
'19700101'
)
)
I faced this problem too. In my sql statement, the error occurred when the date time value is null.
My solution is to check whether the date time value is null using "CASE When". Only running the arithmetic when it is not null, and the problem solved.
i have a bigint field in Microsoft SQL Server 2008R2 filled with ticks (A single tick represents one hundred nanoseconds or one ten-millionth of a second. There are 10,000 ticks in a millisecond.)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.datetime.ticks.aspx
and i need to convert the sum of all records to Days:Hours:Minutes:Seconds:Milliseconds.
it works for a single record:
SELECT CONVERT(TIME, DATEADD(ms, duration/10000, 0)) FROM tblMediaFileProperties WHERE FileId = '6C0A849D-95B4-4755-A923-B9DD8F1AF23E'
but if a sum it up to all records using:
SELECT CONVERT(TIME, DATEADD(ms, SUM(duration/10000), 0)) FROM tblMediaFileProperties
i get a:
Arithmetic overflow error converting expression to data type int.
i know the overflow comes from the CONVERT to Data Type TIME Function...
help's appreciated, thanks!
It's too big for DATEADD which only accepts an int.
Break it into two parts: seconds, then milliseconds.
SELECT CONVERT(TIME,
DATEADD(ms, SUM(duration/10000 % 1000),
DATEADD(ss, SUM(duration/10000000), 0)))
FROM tblMediaFileProperties
And if your total duration goes above 1 day, you can use this to get the days and hr:min:sec:ms separately. It's a matter of cast and string concat if you actually want the result in textual form.
declare #duration bigint
set #duration = 1230000000
SELECT #duration/10000/1000/60/60/24 DAYS,
CONVERT(TIME,
DATEADD(ms, SUM(#duration/10000 % 1000),
DATEADD(ss, SUM(#duration/10000000), 0))) HR_MIN_SEC
Which method provides the best performance when removing the time portion from a datetime field in SQL Server?
a) select DATEADD(dd, DATEDIFF(dd, 0, getdate()), 0)
or
b) select cast(convert(char(11), getdate(), 113) as datetime)
The second method does send a few more bytes either way but that might not be as important as the speed of the conversion.
Both also appear to be very fast, but there might be a difference in speed when dealing with hundreds-of-thousands or more rows?
Also, is it possible that there are even better methods to get rid of the time portion of a datetime in SQL?
Strictly, method a is the least resource intensive:
a) select DATEADD(dd, DATEDIFF(dd, 0, getdate()), 0)
Proven less CPU intensive for the same total duration a million rows by someone with way too much time on their hands: Most efficient way in SQL Server to get a date from date+time?
I saw a similar test elsewhere with similar results too.
I prefer the DATEADD/DATEDIFF because:
varchar is subject to language/dateformat issues
Example: Why is my CASE expression non-deterministic?
float relies on internal storage
it extends to work out first day of month, tomorrow, etc by changing "0" base
Edit, Oct 2011
For SQL Server 2008+, you can CAST to date i.e. CAST(getdate() AS date). Or just use date datatype so no time to remove.
Edit, Jan 2012
A worked example of how flexible this is: Need to calculate by rounded time or date figure in sql server
Edit, May 2012
Do not use this in WHERE clauses and the like without thinking: adding a function or CAST to a column invalidates index usage. See number 2 here Common SQL Programming Mistakes
Now, this does have an example of later SQL Server optimiser versions managing CAST to date correctly, but generally it will be a bad idea ...
Edit, Sep 2018, for datetime2
DECLARE #datetime2value datetime2 = '02180912 11:45' --this is deliberately within datetime2, year 0218
DECLARE #datetime2epoch datetime2 = '19000101'
select DATEADD(dd, DATEDIFF(dd, #datetime2epoch, #datetime2value), #datetime2epoch)
In SQL Server 2008, you can use:
CONVERT(DATE, getdate(), 101)
Of-course this is an old thread but to make it complete.
From SQL 2008 you can use DATE datatype so you can simply do:
SELECT CONVERT(DATE,GETDATE())
In SQL Server 2008, there is a DATE datetype (also a TIME datatype).
CAST(GetDate() as DATE)
or
declare #Dt as DATE = GetDate()
SELECT CAST(FLOOR(CAST(getdate() AS FLOAT)) AS DATETIME)
...is not a good solution, per the comments below.
I would delete this answer, but I'll leave it here as a counter-example since I think the commenters' explanation of why it's not a good idea is still useful.
Here's yet another answer, from another duplicate question:
SELECT CAST(CAST(getutcdate() - 0.50000004 AS int) AS datetime)
This magic number method performs slightly faster than the DATEADD method. (It looks like ~10%)
The CPU Time on several rounds of a million records:
DATEADD MAGIC FLOAT
500 453
453 360
375 375
406 360
But note that these numbers are possibly irrelevant because they are already VERY fast. Unless I had record sets of 100,000 or more, I couldn't even get the CPU Time to read above zero.
Considering the fact that DateAdd is meant for this purpose and is more robust, I'd say use DateAdd.
SELECT CAST(CAST(GETDATE() AS DATE) AS DATETIME)
I really like:
[date] = CONVERT(VARCHAR(10), GETDATE(), 120)
The 120 format code will coerce the date into the ISO 8601 standard:
'YYYY-MM-DD' or '2017-01-09'
Super easy to use in dplyr (R) and pandas (Python)!
BEWARE!
Method a) and b) does NOT always have the same output!
select DATEADD(dd, DATEDIFF(dd, 0, '2013-12-31 23:59:59.999'), 0)
Output: 2014-01-01 00:00:00.000
select cast(convert(char(11), '2013-12-31 23:59:59.999', 113) as datetime)
Output: 2013-12-31 00:00:00.000
(Tested on MS SQL Server 2005 and 2008 R2)
EDIT: According to Adam's comment, this cannot happen if you read the date value from the table, but it can happen if you provide your date value as a literal (example: as a parameter of a stored procedure called via ADO.NET).
See this question:
How can I truncate a datetime in SQL Server?
Whatever you do, don't use the string method. That's about the worst way you could do it.
Already answered but ill throw this out there too...
this suposedly also preforms well but it works by throwing away the decimal (which stores time) from the float and returning only whole part (which is date)
CAST(
FLOOR( CAST( GETDATE() AS FLOAT ) )
AS DATETIME
)
second time I found this solution... i grabbed this code off
CAST(round(cast(getdate()as real),0,1) AS datetime)
This method does not use string function. Date is basically a real datatype with digits before decimal are fraction of a day.
this I guess will be faster than a lot.
For me the code below is always a winner:
SELECT CONVERT(DATETIME, FLOOR(CONVERT(FLOAT,GETDATE())));
select CONVERT(char(10), GetDate(),126)
Strip time on inserts/updates in the first place. As for on-the-fly conversion, nothing can beat a user-defined function maintanability-wise:
select date_only(dd)
The implementation of date_only can be anything you like - now it's abstracted away and calling code is much much cleaner.
I think you mean
cast(floor(cast(getdate()as float))as datetime)
real is only 32-bits, and could lose some information
This is fastest
cast(cast(getdate()+x-0.5 as int)as datetime)
...though only about 10% faster(about 0.49 microseconds CPU vs. 0.58)
This was recommended, and takes the same time in my test just now:
DATEADD(dd, DATEDIFF(dd, 0, getdate()), 0)
In SQL 2008, the SQL CLR function is about 5 times faster than using a SQL function would be, at 1.35 microseconds versus 6.5 microsections, indicating much lower function-call overhead for a SQL CLR function versus a simple SQL UDF.
In SQL 2005, the SQL CLR function is 16 times faster, per my testing, versus this slow function:
create function dateonly ( #dt datetime )
returns datetime
as
begin
return cast(floor(cast(#dt as float))as int)
end
How about select cast(cast my_datetime_field as date) as datetime)? This results in the same date, with the time set to 00:00, but avoids any conversion to text and also avoids any explicit numeric rounding.
I think that if you stick strictly with TSQL that this is the fastest way to truncate the time:
select convert(datetime,convert(int,convert(float,[Modified])))
I found this truncation method to be about 5% faster than the DateAdd method. And this can be easily modified to round to the nearest day like this:
select convert(datetime,ROUND(convert(float,[Modified]),0))
Here I made a function to remove some parts of a datetime for SQL Server. Usage:
First param is the datetime to be stripped off.
Second param is a char:
s: rounds to seconds; removes milliseconds
m: rounds to minutes; removes seconds and milliseconds
h: rounds to hours; removes minutes, seconds and milliseconds.
d: rounds to days; removes hours, minutes, seconds and milliseconds.
Returns the new datetime
create function dbo.uf_RoundDateTime(#dt as datetime, #part as char)
returns datetime
as
begin
if CHARINDEX( #part, 'smhd',0) = 0 return #dt;
return cast(
Case #part
when 's' then convert(varchar(19), #dt, 126)
when 'm' then convert(varchar(17), #dt, 126) + '00'
when 'h' then convert(varchar(14), #dt, 126) + '00:00'
when 'd' then convert(varchar(14), #dt, 112)
end as datetime )
end
Just in case anyone is looking in here for a Sybase version since several of the versions above didn't work
CAST(CONVERT(DATE,GETDATE(),103) AS DATETIME)
Tested in I SQL v11 running on Adaptive Server 15.7
If possible, for special things like this, I like to use CLR functions.
In this case:
[Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.SqlFunction]
public static SqlDateTime DateOnly(SqlDateTime input)
{
if (!input.IsNull)
{
SqlDateTime dt = new SqlDateTime(input.Value.Year, input.Value.Month, input.Value.Day, 0, 0, 0);
return dt;
}
else
return SqlDateTime.Null;
}
I, personally, almost always use User Defined functions for this if dealing with SQL Server 2005 (or lower version), however, it should be noted that there are specific drawbacks to using UDF's, especially if applying them to WHERE clauses (see below and the comments on this answer for further details). If using SQL Server 2008 (or higher) - see below.
In fact, for most databases that I create, I add these UDF's in right near the start since I know there's a 99% chance I'm going to need them sooner or later.
I create one for "date only" & "time only" (although the "date only" one is by far the most used of the two).
Here's some links to a variety of date-related UDF's:
Essential SQL Server Date, Time and DateTime Functions
Get Date Only Function
That last link shows no less than 3 different ways to getting the date only part of a datetime field and mentions some pros and cons of each approach.
If using a UDF, it should be noted that you should try to avoid using the UDF as part of a WHERE clause in a query as this will greatly hinder performance of the query. The main reason for this is that using a UDF in a WHERE clause renders that clause as non-sargable, which means that SQL Server can no longer use an index with that clause in order to improve the speed of query execution. With reference to my own usage of UDF's, I'll frequently use the "raw" date column within the WHERE clause, but apply the UDF to the SELECTed column. In this way, the UDF is only applied to the filtered result-set and not every row of the table as part of the filter.
Of course, the absolute best approach for this is to use SQL Server 2008 (or higher) and separate out your dates and times, as the SQL Server database engine is then natively providing the individual date and time components, and can efficiently query these independently without the need for a UDF or other mechanism to extract either the date or time part from a composite datetime type.
I would use:
CAST
(
CAST(YEAR(DATEFIELD) as varchar(4)) + '/' CAST(MM(DATEFIELD) as varchar(2)) + '/' CAST(DD(DATEFIELD) as varchar(2)) as datetime
)
Thus effectively creating a new field from the date field you already have.