Unless the Progress developers have gone out of their way to add front end validation to their application to prevent mistyped dates going into the database, then most large Progress databases will undoubtedly have some dates before 1753 simply due to user typos. Subsequently, when transferring data from Progress to SQL either via replication or a batch dump & load, these invalid dates (only to SQL) cause the whole record to be rejected by SQL. I would consider any kind of data loss when moving data from one platform to another as a potential show stopper hence the point about these dates was raised i.e. the issue is recognised and solved. Pro2SQL currently handles these invalid dates by changing the year on the offending value to 1753 so that SQL does not reject the record. This wont be an issue in the future when the product supports SQLs DateTime2 data type. There are other challenges solved in Pro2SQL like SQL's 8kb limit on char fields compared to 32kb for char fields in Progress, but in my experience it is the prevalence of mistyped dates that cause the issues.