If the version remained at 8.x, developers would be restricted in what they can do,
mostly bug fixes, and minor new features.
But when the versioning was changed, the software would have been checked out of 8.x
and checked into 9.x.
With a major release, the developers are free to check in n
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: database upgrade policy?
>Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:16:02 -0800
>
>Sure. We seemed to be suffering from bug 1904199 or a variant. We
>expe
8.1.7 is no where near the likes of 9i (in my opinion), I couldn't imagine
this to be true, although I have nothing here nor there to back it up, just
a comment I feel.
"Do not criticize someone until you walked a mile in their shoes, that way
when you criticize them, you are a mile a way and hav
At 03:16 PM 8/23/2001, George Schlossnagle wrote:
>DATABASE OPEN RESETLOGS. A choice tidbit from the bug report:
>
>"This could be quite serious for customers as there is no simple way out
>of this scenario."
i think that wins my vote for understatement of the month!;-)
--
Bill "Shrek" Thate
George,
Can you tell us the specific problem you had that caused you the total lost
of database under 9i?
Thanks.
Bing
-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 11:52 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
We just had a total database lost under 9i. Known bug, no workar
Looks like this is the link you want to see ...
http://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/ml2_documents.showFrameDocument?p_
database_id=BUG&p_id=1904199
if the above link is broken the bug# is 1904199. It has something to do with
automatic undo management.
Well we will keep fingers crossed.
HT
We just had a total database lost under 9i. Known bug, no workaround,
better-luck-next-time type situation. Luckily for us we were testing it on
a non-critical database, but that puts me off it for a while.
George
- Original Message -
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL
George,
Can you go into details about the error please? We are starting testing on
9i, and I AM interested ...
Raj
__
Rajendra Jamadagni MIS, ESPN Inc.
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot com
Any opinion expressed here is person
In the case of 816, it is desupported in October, so get to 817 ASAP.
In the case of patches, try to watch for problems noted in MetaLink. Things like
SQL*Net Demial Of Service fixes, I like to get them in right away. Otherwise, most
client make me implement "if it is not broken, do not patch i
;this scenario."
>
>Buyer beware.
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: JOE TESTA
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:08 PM
> Subject: Re: database upgrade policy?
>
>
> George, are you will
re is no
simple way out of this scenario."
Buyer beware.
- Original Message -
From:
JOE
TESTA
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:08
PM
Subject: Re: database upgrade
policy?
George, are you willing to expand on w
what was the bug
>From: "George Schlossnagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: database upgrade policy?
>Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:52:29 -0800
>
>We just
George, are you willing to expand on what it was, for the rest of us?
joe
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/23/01 02:52PM >>>We
just had a total database lost under 9i. Known bug, no
workaround,better-luck-next-time type situation. Luckily for us we
were testing it ona non-critical database, but t
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 09:11:56AM -0800, JOE TESTA wrote:
> you are crazy :) but i like it anyways.
>
> since i'm running it on a non -supported platform anything i find wouldnt be any
>good anyways :)
>
> we'll look forward to you sharing your experiences :)
--
What doesn't kill you will
Some people say that 8.1.7 was really the first beta release of 9i and that
Oracle called it 8.1.7 so people wouldn't be afraid to implement it as "9i".
If that's true then 9.0.1 is really the second release of 9i.
david
-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:37 PM
To: Mu
A co-worker tried 9i for a while and used automatic
rollback semgent management.
We started getting database locks on SMON.
NO ONE was on the system and we were routinely
getting system locks and ORA-600s in the middle
of the night.
We scraped the idea and moved back to 8.1.6 for our
reporting da
but the banner says 9.0.1 :)
joe
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/23/01 01:27PM
>>>Good for you, David. We are moving in that direction,
too. I convincepeople by saying 9i is really 8.2.Paul
BaumgartelMortgageSight Holdings,
LLC[EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original
Message-Sent: Thursday, August
I am not going to say anything. That's cool, you'll find all of the bugs
and report them back to us:)
hehehe...whoo ho!!!
Just kidding Dave, good luck!!
Kev
-Original Message-
Wagoner
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:41 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Okay, I know som
you are crazy :) but i like it anyways.
since i'm running it on a non -supported platform anything i find wouldnt
be any good anyways :)
we'll look forward to you sharing your experiences :)
joe
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/23/01 12:40PM
>>>Okay, I know some of you are going to call me craz
Good for you, David. We are moving in that direction, too. I convince
people by saying 9i is really 8.2.
Paul Baumgartel
MortgageSight Holdings, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:41 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Okay, I know so
Okay, I know some of you are going to call me crazy but here goes...
**We're now using 9i in Production**
There, I admit it. But I have to ask you this- do you think 9i will be more
buggy than the 8.1.6 that we were running that was causing core dumps,
referential integrity violations, etc.? I
Paul,
No it's more like, "Hey, I heard there is a new version of the database
out, do we have it yet? Why not? Can we have it? Yeah let's do it, that
would be cool. Oh and by the way I installed a beta service pack on my
machine, that's ok right?"...crap like that:)
KK
-Original M
Kevin,
What do you mean?
(running 8.1.7.2.1 on the destructo box, 8.1.7.1.5 on the development box,
W2K Pro)
Paul
Original Message
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:06:39 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: Fat City Network Services, San Diego, California
To: Multiple rec
Just for the PLEASURE of using OUI!
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Kostyszyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:07 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: database upgrade policy?
>
>
> I have peop
I have people here who just want to upgrade for the sake of
upgrading...rrggg..ok.:)
KK
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 5:01 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Well, we wanted to upgrade from 8.0.4 to 8.1.6 last year because it had been
desupport
Well, we wanted to upgrade from 8.0.4 to 8.1.6 last year because it had been
desupported. We got most of the machines upgraded except for the main
production machine. I wanted to upgrade that last September. I have
finally gotten permission to tentatively schedule the for next month (one
year l
Lisa,
You need some work to do
Certifiable Gimp Monkey?? Stub you toe while swinging on the trapeze?
ROR mô¿ôm
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/22/01 12:45PM >>>
Don't upgrade unless there is a very good reason.
All of these are candidates
1. current oracle version is unstable
2. specific bug
a a glutton for punishment. Dev, sure why not, just dont let the
developers get to attached to the new features, prod?, i wouldnt update any prod
database(unless forced to by oracle corp) until 9.1 at earliest, yes there are
some kewl things, but heck the latest 8.1.7 patchset has 22 pag
We were running 8.1.6.0.0 and just recently encountered the ORA-7445 errors,
which caused core dumps and invalidated the referential integrity of our
database. Oracle recommended the 8.1.6.3 patchset. We decided to skip that
and go for 8.1.7 but for some reason Oracle mailed us the 9i CDs. I gu
Title: RE: database upgrade policy?
Don't upgrade unless there is a very good reason.
All of these are candidates
1. current oracle version is unstable
2. specific bug addressed by an upgrade/patch, as identified by support
3. need to utilize new feature
4. desupport date comi
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:45:27AM -0800, Mark Marsden wrote:
> Hi Listers
>
> I'm on 8.1.6.0.0 and wondering about upgrading to 8.1.6.3.1(?)
> as I get the occasional ORA-600/ORA-7445.
Doc ID: Note:123178.1
Product / Platform: Oracle8i, Release 2 (8.1.6)
Error Correction Support ends on
Highly depends.
I tend to stay back from the latest versions for some time.
I also tend to upgrade for functionality, and upgrade when I have existing
problems that are told to be fixed.
Sometimes if I start falling back versions and have no reason either way, I
will upgrade my development datab
32 matches
Mail list logo
