Re: Are you better than...?

Sounds promising. What is the current version/patch level for 9i? Any recommendations for which version we should be using (not 9.2.0.2.0 obviously)?

Also, I forgot to note that I don't know what version of Unix I'm using. This is the first time I've had to use this particular Unix machine, and the system admin has changed the logon banner.

We (I) appreciate the help. We will be pushing for Metalink access at our site. We have had other issues with Oracle that needed quicker attention.

"Andy Hassall" <andy_at_andyh.co.uk> wrote in message news:frbufvksdsorkdmhp1clgahasitd8914pq_at_4ax.com...
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:23:33 -0400, "Brian E Dick" <bdick_at_cox.net> wrote:
>
> > SQL-06553: PLS-306: wrong number or types of arguments in call to
> >'XMLCONCAT'
> >
> >The code runs fine on our Win2K development machines. When comparing the
> >spfile's to the two machines, I found two unexpected differences. The
Win2K
> >machine has Oracle V9.2.0.1.0 running as a MTS. The Unix machine has
Oracle
> >V9.2.0.2.0 running as a dedicated server.
>
> Well... the 9.2.0.3 patch set notes has the following as part of the
process
> of applying it:
>
> 3. Drop the xmlconcat function by running the following commands:
> drop public synonym xmlconcat;
> drop function xmlconcat;
>
> The note also includes this in the 'fixed bugs' section:
>
> Bug 2685546 Fixed: 9203
> Migration / Upgrade / Downgrade
> XMLCONCAT function should be dropped after 9201 -> 9202 upgrade
> Workaround:
> Manually drop the xmlconcat function
>
> --
> Andy Hassall (andy@andyh.co.uk) icq(5747695) (http://www.andyh.co.uk)
> Space: disk usage analysis tool (http://www.andyhsoftware.co.uk/space)
Received on Sun Jun 29 2003 - 16:41:49 CDT