Yes, it is always 1/1/1901.
>Neither of them is optimaziable so speed should be about the same but first is easier to read. I don't see why thaere should be any difference between SQL 2000 and SQL 2005 in this case.
>What's is the date part of the runtime column? Is it some irrelevant constant date?
>
>>Do you know if I am correct in thinking the 1st example will always be faster and both will both work in SQL 2000 and SQL 2005?
>>
>>
>>SELECT * from schedl
>> where CONVERT(VARCHAR(10),runtime,108) < = '13:12:59'
>>
>>select * from schedl
>> where runtime - CAST(FLOOR(CAST(runtime AS float)) AS datetime) < = '13:12:59'
>>
.·*´¨)
.·`TCH
(..·*
010000110101001101101000011000010111001001110000010011110111001001000010011101010111001101110100
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
Vita contingit, Vive cum eo. (Life Happens, Live With it.)
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." -- author unknown
"De omnibus dubitandum"
