RE: ** latest stable oracle 10G client (thread drifted to 11g)

From: A Joshi <>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:27:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>

Thanks a lot Jared, Mark. Thanks
  • On Sun, 2/8/09, Mark W. Farnham <> wrote: From: Mark W. Farnham <> Subject: RE: ** latest stable oracle 10G client (thread drifted to 11g) To:, Cc: Date: Sunday, February 8, 2009, 9:10 PM

That fact that the most complicated
configurable off the shelf software suite I know of, Oracle E-business Suite, IS certified on 11g speaks volumes to me.


The complexity of that suite together with its attendant tools and client software must have made certification a monumental task. Not 100% of the instructions and attendant software tools for doing the upgrade path from rapidinstall through interoperability with 11g and all the attendant Critical Patch Updates (I refuse to us the acronyn that should only refer to central processing units) worked exactly as they were supposed to. Some of the init parameter generated for the starting point had parameters that are no longer valid with 11g, and there were miscellaneous problems that could be overcome with some elbow grease.


But finally getting to the point: Not one single thing went wrong that was attributable to the 11g rdbms functioning at variance with the way it is supposed to work. Not one single thing. Now I suppose some queries might yet crop up that have retrograde plans compared to 10g. My impression is that 11g, its CBO, and its tools for improving retrograde plans are all better than 10g. I can nearly guarantee you that there will remain a non-zero set of queries that will get better plans from the previous release on any release upgrade that changes the CBO; that set seems likely to be small moving to 11g.


That is my long winded way of saying I
believe JaredĒs sense of why various other products are not yet certified on 11g is absolutely correct.






From: [] On Behalf Of Jared Still

Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009
12:37 PM



Subject: Re: ** latest stable
oracle 10G client


On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Nuno Souto <> wrote:

The simple fact that neither Hyperion, nor Peoplesoft or JDE support

11g yet says a lot: they are all Oracle sub-products.  SAP, same.

And just about most of the third party applications out there.

That says a lot about the level of confidence 11g inspires.

Personally I think it says more about the time and effort required to fully

certify an application for use with a version of a database.

Anyone familiar with SAP can attest to that.  The CPU's are not certified

for use until well after their release.

New patch levels and versions take quite some time.

We used last summer for SAP upgrades, as had not

been officially sanctioned early enough to use it in our upgrade plans.

Believe me, I sorely wanted to use, as was rather buggy.

While the issues were addressed with workarounds and 'event' parameters

for SAP, caused issues with NetBackup.

I haven't yet checked to see if 11iR1 is approved for SAP.


Jared Still

Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist


Received on Tue Feb 10 2009 - 15:27:09 CST

Original text of this message