Re: Multiple Versions of Oracle Client

From: Frank van Bortel <fvanbortel_at_netscape.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:58 +0100
Message-ID: <c1lkt9$k4c$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>

Bib Endum wrote:

> "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> a écrit dans le message de
> news:1074184120.244168_at_yasure...
>

>>I would be happy to explore upgrading you to versions of Oracle software
>>supported in the current millenium and capable of performing what you
>>want.   ;-)
>>
>>If you are asking how to keep unsupported software working on operating
>>systems on which it was never certified going forward I think you are
>>just throwing good money (for payroll) after bad.
>>

>
>
> Yes Daniel you are right in the fact that you should not keep antedeluvian
> release for too long, but sometimes, you have to do so, not to mention that
> " end of life " product generally are pretty bug free. Also, even with 2
> supported release you might end up with more than one oracle home on the
> client and get into some sort of conflict (Ex: forms6i client server (uses
> oracle 8.0 client) and oracle 8i client for an OCI or ODBC or whatever other
> app)
>
> As for the original poster, I admit it is strange that oracle creates
> sub-branches in the registry for its oracle home, but keeps some stuff on
> the parent branch. We did notice that using the ORACLE HOME SELECTOR tool
> (Available with some products), in our case sometimes fixed some problems
> but I can't confirm that it might fix all the problems.
>
> We also copied registry keys from the "top" branch to the oracle homes
> sub-branches (Eg: TNS_ADMIN and NLS_LANG keys) and it also fixed some
> problems.
>
>

The "top" branch is a V7/8.0 entry (not multiple-home aware). The others ("descendants") are 8i and later products, i.e. multiple-home aware

-- 

Regards,
Frank van Bortel

Received on Thu Feb 26 2004 - 14:29:58 CST