RE: rman errors

From: Mark W. Farnham <>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 12:06:48 -0500
Message-ID: <>

What Tanel wrote, plus, a common reason for the patched binary(ies) to not actually get slapped into place is if another instance on that node is running the same binary (or one of the tools is being executed while the relink is supposed to happen). Less common is an improperly killed process still having a file handle on the executable that you're trying to replace. I would think your logs from patching would show the failure, but looking at the date last modified for the files in your "oracle" bins and library might also be useful.

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Tanel Poder
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 7:51 AM To:; 'Oracle-L Group' Subject: RE: rman errors

Hi Brian,

Every parameter has an internal constant number associated with it. These numbers may change between releases/patchsets as new parameters are added (and some removed).

The Oracle binary patching works roughly like this on Unix:

  1. replace the Oracle kernel module files (.o or .so files) in libserver.a with new versions
  2. relink Oracle and tools (relink takes the module files from libserver.a and links them to oracle binary)

So I suspect something failed either in step 1 or 2.

You can start with relinking Oracle binary and all the tools (rman too).

If it still doesn't work, then compare the contents of libserver.a's on both installations.

Btw, are you running RMAN from the patched Oracle home and not the old one, right?

Tanel Poder


> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [] On Behalf Of Zelli, Brian
> Sent: 28 February 2009 13:46
> To: Oracle-L Group
> Subject: rman errors
> I upgraded yesterday from to and now I get
> this error when running rman:
> RMAN-10002: ORACLE error: ORA-00096: invalid value SIGNATURE
> for parameter remote_dependencies_mode, must be from among
>,,, ,,,
>,, 10.1.0,, 9.2.0, 9.0.1, 9.0.0,
> 8.1.7, 8.1.6, 8.1.5, 8.1.4, 8.1.3, 8.1.0
> I set the init parameter remote_dependencies_mode=SIGNATURE
> and that still failed with the same error.
> I set it back to TIMEZONE which is the default and that
> doesn't work.Docs say it's one or the other.
> What am I missing?
> Funny thing is I upgrade another instance earlier in the week
> that was exactly the same and I am not having this problem.
> ciao,
> Brian
-- --
Received on Sat Feb 28 2009 - 11:06:48 CST

Original text of this message