Error Timeout Unix 2038
Contents |
for computing and data storage situations in which time values are stored or calculated as a signed 32-bit integer, and this number is interpreted as the number of what is unix 32 bit time seconds since 00:00:00 UTC on 1 January 1970 ("the epoch").[1] Such implementations cannot what is unix time encode times after 03:14:07 UTC on 19 January 2038, a problem similar to but not entirely analogous to the "Y2K
2038 End Of The World
problem" (also known as the "Millennium Bug"), in which 2-digit values representing the number of years since 1900 could not encode the year 2000 or later. Most 32-bit Unix-like systems store and manipulate
Year 2038 Problem Fix
time in this "Unix time" format, so the year 2038 problem is sometimes referred to as the "Unix Millennium Bug" by association. Contents 1 Technical cause 2 Early problems 3 Vulnerable systems 4 Data structures with time problems 5 NTP timestamps 6 Solutions 7 See also 8 Notes 9 References 10 External links Technical cause[edit] The latest time that can be represented in Unix's signed 32-bit 64 bit unix time end integer time format is 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, 19 January 2038 (2,147,483,647 seconds after 1 January 1970).[2] Times beyond that will "wrap around" and be stored internally as a negative number, which these systems will interpret as having occurred on 13 December 1901 rather than 19 January 2038. This is caused by integer overflow. The counter "runs out" of usable bits, "increments" the sign bit instead, and reports a maximally negative number (continuing to count up, toward zero). Resulting erroneous calculations on such systems are likely to cause problems for users and other relying parties. Programs that work with future dates will begin to run into problems sooner; for example a program that works with dates 20 years in the future will have to be fixed no later than 2018. Early problems[edit] This section possibly contains previously unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (May 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) In May 2006, reports surfaced of an early manifestation of the Y2038 problem in the AOLserver software. The software was designed with a kludge to
2038 readiness project. Without your encouragement, this Web page would be a cobweb site on archive.org by now. Who says I don't have fans? :-) Mister Porquet, I was appalled http://maul.deepsky.com/~merovech/2038.html when I came across your 2038.org website. This liberal propaganda makes me ashamed that internet or even computers exist. Simply put, the Y2k38 bug isn't coming. Obviously you have ulterior motives. It disgusts me that http://ellislab.com/forums/viewreply/523544/ our children's minds are filled with such outrageous ideas. The Y2k disaster never came and it's time that we stop living in fear of these lies that fill the internet. William, please take down what is your site. This is madness. Sincerely, Pat Metzner -- Oh, hello Pat, Wow, to think this little gem of an email almost got lost in my spam folder... Unless you'd actually like to discuss or debate something to do with the year 2038 bug, I suggest you go rant elsewhere. There's lots of perfectly good liberal propaganda with ulterior motives elsewhere on the Net you can chew on. Sincerely, what is unix W. What is the year 2038 bug? What causes it? What operating systems, platforms, and applications are affected by it? What can I do about it? How is the 2038 problem related to the John Titor story? Where can I find more information about it and other date-related bugs? What is the year 2038 bug? In the first month of the year 2038 C.E. many computers will encounter a date-related bug in their operating systems and/or in the applications they run. This can result in incorrect and grossly inaccurate dates being reported by the operating system and/or applications. The effect of this bug is hard to predict, because many applications are not prepared for the resulting "skip" in reported time - anywhere from 1901 to a "broken record" repeat of the reported time at the second the bug occurs. Also, leap seconds may make some small adjustment to the actual time the bug expresses itself. I expect this bug to cause serious problems on many platforms, especially Unix and Unix-like platforms, because these systems will "run out of time". Starting at GMT 03:14:07, Tuesday, January 19, 2038, I fully expect to see lots of systems around the world breaking magnificently: satellites falling out of orbit, massive
forgot password? This is an archived forum and may no longer be relevant. The active forums are here. Advanced Search Any thoughts on date and entries after 2038? (The UNIX epoch and Timestamp) GDmac - expocom Posted: 23 January 2009 11:59 AM Joined: 2007-03-07350 posts In the changelog for 1.6.7. the error-message for dates outside the range / bounds for 1902 - 2037 is changed. 2038 is coming ever more closer, and already some trend-analyzing software (30 year trends) and some ISP *cough*AOL* using a generous timeout-setting had their problems with the end of time in 2038. (unix epoch) - What are your thoughts (and Ellislab's) on dates inside EE and have you already thought of an approach to handle this coming "end-date" ? - Second, Are there users who bumped into these bounds? For instance for a historic list (old vehicles?) or a future list (kyoto-criteria?) with entry-dates outside these bounds. Regards, GDmac ps. On 13 februari 2009 23:31:30 a nice-looking timestamp of 1234567890 will roll by Ingmar Greil Posted: 23 January 2009 12:02 PM [ # 1 ] Joined: 2004-05-1529235 posts Personally, I am a huge fan of the times stamp, it is a simple, elegant concept that gets the job done. If you use negative values, a date before the beginning of the epoch is easily possible, and as to the 2038 issue, I'm quite confident we'll have made the leap to 64 bit arithmetic by then. GDmac - expocom Posted: 23 January 2009 03:17 PM [ # 2 ] Joined: 2007-03-07350 posts Ha, Ingmar, yes unix timestamps are an elegant concept (insert reference to other thread about mysql-datetime-formats ). 64 bit is definitely the answer, for the future. If you search very hard you can find a mention in a 2005 php minute meeting where a ‘new' int64 type is discussed. i couldn't find any further references to that int64 in the php-documentation and the ‘standard' INTEGER is 32 or 64 bit depending completely on the platform being used. Interesting is a weblog-entry on phpadvent about the datetime-class (since PHP 5.2) that supp