FAQ
I haven't applied it to any lin32 boxes, but have been testing it on win32.
So far, no issues.
Just wondering if anyone has hit any potholes out there.

thanks.

Paul

--
#/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
# f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Search Discussions

  • Mercadante, Thomas F at Mar 25, 2005 at 3:28 pm
    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.

    We just applied the "January 2005" 1st quarter patch to one of our 9.2.0.4
    databases. The patch process has a bug. It doesn't update the inventory
    xml file properly. The work-around is to go in and update the file by hand.
    Talk about crap. It's bad enough that Oracle can't test the database
    software well enough and they have forced us into this monthly/quarterly
    patching process. But now, they can't even create patching software that
    works good enough without *it* having bugs in it.

    Looks to me like Oracle has slipped back to the "bad old days" of releasing
    stuff much too soon before it's ready. And we are stuck with cleaning up
    after them.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Drake
    Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:59 PM
    To: Oracle Discussion List
    Subject: how goes 10.1.0.4 testing?

    I haven't applied it to any lin32 boxes, but have been testing it on win32.
    So far, no issues.
    Just wondering if anyone has hit any potholes out there.

    thanks.

    Paul

    --
    #/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
    # f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
  • Paul Drake at Mar 25, 2005 at 4:23 pm
    uh, yeah.
    my favorite is if one installed 8i/9i on win32 using defaults which
    put the oracle home in say d:\oracle\ora92 and the inventory location
    (inst_loc) in c:\program files\oracle\Inventory ... 10.1 won't even
    install.
    The solution is to uninstall/reinstall using 10g OFA.
    Not a huge deal, just adds to the maintenance window and adds a reboot.
    With an uninstall/reinstall, no sense jumping through the hoops of the
    10.1.0.2, 9.2.0.5.0, 9.2.0.5.3 opatch fun, might as well go straight
    to 9.2.0.6. Maybe.
    setting %ORACLE_BASE%=D:\oracle sure works better, with the new 9.2
    home being D:\oracle\product\9.2.0, just like on the *nix installs.
    (feel free to chime in here MT).
    9.2.0.5.3 was pretty good as far as we were concerned. Hit no bugs.
    9.2.0.6 is no fun. 2 one-off patchsets already for win32 out there ...
    didn't mess with them.
    10.1.0.3 has lots of fixes (issues) ... which is why we're being
    ambitious on testing 10.1.0.4
    (I ignored 8.0.x entirely, as well as 8.1.5 and 9.0.1).
    Figured with the downtime windows available last night/today that I'd
    get 10.1.0.4 rolled out to some test servers.

    gotta do something until the poker game tonight ...

    Paul



    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:24:24 -0500, Mercadante, Thomas F
    wrote:
    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.

    We just applied the "January 2005" 1st quarter patch to one of our 9.2.0.4
    databases. The patch process has a bug. It doesn't update the inventory
    xml file properly. The work-around is to go in and update the file by hand.
    Talk about crap. It's bad enough that Oracle can't test the database
    software well enough and they have forced us into this monthly/quarterly
    patching process. But now, they can't even create patching software that
    works good enough without *it* having bugs in it.

    Looks to me like Oracle has slipped back to the "bad old days" of releasing
    stuff much too soon before it's ready. And we are stuck with cleaning up
    after them.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Drake
    Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:59 PM
    To: Oracle Discussion List
    Subject: how goes 10.1.0.4 testing?

    I haven't applied it to any lin32 boxes, but have been testing it on win32.
    So far, no issues.
    Just wondering if anyone has hit any potholes out there.

    thanks.

    Paul

    --
    #/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
    # f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
    --
    #/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
    # f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
  • Mhthomas at Mar 25, 2005 at 7:21 pm
    Hi,

    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:24:24 -0500, Mercadante, Thomas F
    wrote:
    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.

    We just applied the "January 2005" 1st quarter patch to one of our 9.2.0.4
    databases. The patch process has a bug. It doesn't update the inventory
    xml file properly. The work-around is to go in and update the file by hand.
    A couple days ago I noticed a security rollup patch. It was after "Jan
    2005" patch, but it might have been 10g only. I'm curious if it might
    be related to the same thing?

    Its too late on Friday to go looking, so it will wait till Monday. :-)

    Regards,

    Mike Thomas
  • Paul Drake at Mar 26, 2005 at 1:04 pm
    Mike,

    That was nearly entirely 10.1.0.3.1 stuff.
    Most of it concerned revoking privileges from public on built-in packages.
    The 10.1.0.4 patchset includes such fixes.

    Paul
    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 19:17:03 -0500, mhthomas wrote:
    Hi,

    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:24:24 -0500, Mercadante, Thomas F
    wrote:
    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.

    We just applied the "January 2005" 1st quarter patch to one of our 9.2.0.4
    databases. The patch process has a bug. It doesn't update the inventory
    xml file properly. The work-around is to go in and update the file by hand.
    A couple days ago I noticed a security rollup patch. It was after "Jan
    2005" patch, but it might have been 10g only. I'm curious if it might
    be related to the same thing?

    Its too late on Friday to go looking, so it will wait till Monday. :-)

    Regards,

    Mike Thomas
    --
    #/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
    # f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
  • Niall Litchfield at Mar 29, 2005 at 2:51 am

    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:24:24 -0500, Mercadante, Thomas F wrote:
    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.
    I'm curious, what makes you think 10.2 will be better from a software
    quality and patching perspective? (as opposed to feature list).
  • Mladen Gogala at Mar 29, 2005 at 7:34 am

    On 03/29/2005 02:47:42 AM, Niall Litchfield wrote:
    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:24:24 -0500, Mercadante, Thomas F
    I'm curious, what makes you think 10.2 will be better from a software
    quality and patching perspective? (as opposed to feature list).
    It's probably the eternal human optimism or, as they put it, faith. People
    believe in the things like the eternal life or reincarnation without a shre=
    d
    of an evidence, so why shouldn't they believe in The One who will come
    and write a bug free version of Oracle?
    --=20
    Mladen Gogala
    Oracle DBA
  • Paul Drake at Mar 25, 2005 at 5:47 pm
    Mladen,

    Actually, in 10.1 onward, they use the "alter system flush
    shared_pool" liberally in routines like catpatch.
    But yeah, I've read enough readmes that I don't skip that one.
    something about the number 150 doesn't sit right with me, I use 160.

    Paul

    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:46:56 -0500, Mladen Gogala
    wrote:
    Paul Drake wrote:
    gotta do something until the poker game tonight ...

    Paul
    Paul, be aware that you must have JAVA_POOL at least 150M.
    @?/rdbms/admin/catpatch.sql will fail miserably
    if you don't have it. Relink goes fine on FC3, no problems there.

    --
    Mladen Gogala
    Oracle DBA
    Ext. 121
    --
    #/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
    # f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
  • Mercadante, Thomas F at Mar 28, 2005 at 12:06 pm
    Here's another update to this mess. Not only does the patch process have a
    bug, the updated database is throwing an ORA-600 bug caused by the patch.
    Anybody want to guess Oracle's resolution?

    Upgrade to 9.2.0.6 - but first back the patch out.

    Un-freekin-believable.

    We are going to back the security patch out.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Mercadante, Thomas F
    Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 3:24 PM
    To: 'bdbafh_at_gmail.com'; Oracle Discussion List
    Subject: RE: how goes 10.1.0.4 testing?

    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.

    We just applied the "January 2005" 1st quarter patch to one of our 9.2.0.4
    databases. The patch process has a bug. It doesn't update the inventory
    xml file properly. The work-around is to go in and update the file by hand.
    Talk about crap. It's bad enough that Oracle can't test the database
    software well enough and they have forced us into this monthly/quarterly
    patching process. But now, they can't even create patching software that
    works good enough without *it* having bugs in it.

    Looks to me like Oracle has slipped back to the "bad old days" of releasing
    stuff much too soon before it's ready. And we are stuck with cleaning up
    after them.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Drake
    Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:59 PM
    To: Oracle Discussion List
    Subject: how goes 10.1.0.4 testing?

    I haven't applied it to any lin32 boxes, but have been testing it on win32.
    So far, no issues.
    Just wondering if anyone has hit any potholes out there.

    thanks.

    Paul

    --
    #/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
    # f=ma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
    --
    http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
  • Mercadante, Thomas F at Mar 29, 2005 at 7:47 am
    Niall,

    What Mladen said.

    Also, and this is my opinion from experience only, Oracle tends to release
    new features that are not yet fully realized in actual working code. All
    you need to do is to take a look at how quickly patch set #1 comes out after
    release #1 comes out. Sometimes, the patches that are available are for
    things that were fixed in the prior release of the software (like 9.2.0.4
    something works, and it's broken in 10.1, so a patch comes out to catch 10.1
    up to 9.2.0.4). Please don't ask me for specific examples of this.

    And the new features that are release may have passed beta testing. But
    once they start getting hit by the rest of the world, the stuff really hits
    the fan.

    Of course, waiting for release 2 puts us in the position of installing
    (probably) the final release of the software just before version 11.x comes
    out. But I'd rather be a release behind running stable software than
    spending my client's time patching buggy software.

    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Niall Litchfield
    Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 AM
    To: thomas.mercadante_at_labor.state.ny.us
    Cc: bdbafh_at_gmail.com; Oracle Discussion List
    Subject: Re: how goes 10.1.0.4 testing?

    On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:24:24 -0500, Mercadante, Thomas F
    wrote:
    I'm waiting for 10.2. There is no way I would recommend 10.1 to my current
    employer.
    I'm curious, what makes you think 10.2 will be better from a software
    quality and patching perspective? (as opposed to feature list).

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouporacle-l @
categoriesoracle
postedMar 25, '05 at 3:02p
activeMar 29, '05 at 7:47a
posts10
users5
websiteoracle.com

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase