RE: 9.2.0.2 / 9.2.04 -- was RE: updating singly sys packages

From: Jamadagni, Rajendra <Rajendra.Jamadagni_at_espn.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:19:27 -0500
Message-ID: <A186CBDC8B1D61438BC50F1A77E91F73057C1A93@xchgbrsm1.corp.espn.pvt>

In baseline versions of 9204 there was a bug that would throw 600s if you run

select 'A' from dual order by 1
/

There is a patch to fix that ... (and we have that installed too) We basically upgraded one of RAC instances to 9204 to take advantages for big fixes related to CLOBs, XML, AQ related stuff ... nothing else.

Raj

Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal. select standard_disclaimer from company_requirements; QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !

-----Original Message-----

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Hemant K Chitale Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:27 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: 9.2.0.2 / 9.2.04 -- was RE: updating singly sys packages

Robert,

Raj's question was to Juan about why he, Juan, wanted the 9.2.0.4 utl_file specifically.

Like Raj, I too am running some 9.2.0.2 instances, one 9.2.0.2 RAC. All newer 9i instances
at my site are 9.2.0.4 [with two patches]. I have found 9.2.0.2 stable enough not to just "MUST upgrade ASAP".

Running multiple versions and patchset levels is sometimes a requirement when you
need 24x7 and cannot afford downtime.

Hemant

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.

--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html


-----------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Sat Feb 28 2004 - 08:17:14 CST