8.1.7.4.9 has the fixes for security alerts 48-52 and it is already
superseded by 8.1.7.4.10.
--
Terry Dykstra
Canadian Forest Oil Ltd.
"Paul Drake" <drak0nian_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1ac7c7b3.0305011907.2cd0c687_at_posting.google.com...
> cameron.cleland_at_ci.sj.ca.us (horse person) wrote in message
news:<ee3c77d3.0305011208.da951e_at_posting.google.com>...
> > I have an 8.1.7.0 database that I want to patch to 8.1.7.4 There are
> > no resources to test the patch. At all. so my question is, what is a
> > bigger risk? Running an unpatched database, or patching without
> > testing? If you had no resources for testing, would you go ahead and
> > install the patch anyway?
>
> okay, I'll bite.
>
> No one in your company has a workstation or a laptop capable of
> supporting a subset of your app data? This sounds like an excellent
> opportunity for you to have your company purchase a new laptop
> (provided that you're on win32 or linux). For under $1500 - you can
> pickup a 2.4 GHz unit with 512M of ram and a 60 GB HD. Yes, it won't
> perform the same as your server - but that is not the point.
> you're not testing performance so much as errors and loss of
> functionality, e.g. ORA-00600 {729] [space leak] [1048576] [] [] [] []
> [].
>
> I do most of my 9.2 hacking on my laptop during my train time.
>
> the main patchsets (e.g. 8.1.7.4.1) are regression tested. these carry
> the least risk - but behavior of the CBO could change. Unfortunately,
> this particular patchset addresses none of the issues raised by
> security alerts 48-54, which may be one of your major motivating
> factors for applying patches.
>
> If you have no current issues with the .0.0 release, by all means stay
> on it.
> If you open any issues with Oracle Support - their first line will
> likely be - upgrade to the current supported release (8.1.7.4.1) - but
> don't apply a one-off patchset unless required.
>
> you absolutlely do not want to apply patchset 8.1.7.4.10 without
> thorough testing. make sure that you spool the output of the
> dictionary rebuild to a file - you'll need it. read the readme.txt
> file completely.
>
> Paul
Received on Fri May 02 2003 - 09:32:44 CDT
