Re: very impressed by 11g
From: John Hurley <johnthehurley_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 07:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <10e117e8-305b-4d4e-9060-4e6fca67434b_at_h9g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 24, 3:50 pm, "Gerard H. Pille" <g..._at_skynet.be> wrote:
> Months ago we upgraded our main database to 11g, and after tuning a number of selects, we were
> running happily along. A couple of weeks ago, we noticed we'd forgotten to change the
> compatible parameter to 11.2 or something, so, yesterday we set that straight.
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 07:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <10e117e8-305b-4d4e-9060-4e6fca67434b_at_h9g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 24, 3:50 pm, "Gerard H. Pille" <g..._at_skynet.be> wrote:
> Months ago we upgraded our main database to 11g, and after tuning a number of selects, we were
> running happily along. A couple of weeks ago, we noticed we'd forgotten to change the
> compatible parameter to 11.2 or something, so, yesterday we set that straight.
You did not test out the impact of changing the compatible parameter for your "main database" prior to the production implementation?
Can you clone your database and setup an adequate test environment and figure out what has changed? Received on Wed Apr 25 2012 - 09:10:47 CDT