Re: patch with no testing

horse person wrote:

> There are good reasons to patch even if there are no obvious problems.
> Oracle patch sets improve performance, protect against data
> corruption, fix incorrect results, solve memory leaks, improve
> security, etc, etc. So just because you are not receiving an error
> doesnt mean a patch shouldn't be applied.
>
> So I ask again: what is safer? running unpatched or patching without
> testing? To me it is safer to patch with no testing since the patches
> fix so many errors, and is thoroughly tested by oracle.

I have excused people from employment for doing anything to a production environment without testing and QA sign-off.

The length of your employment may vary depending upon your management and whether they prefer to make investments before problems occur or just clean up the messes.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/extinfo/certprog/oad/oad_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)