Re: Samba and 10g

From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:45:14 +0000
Message-ID: <7765c897041122084513d4cd1b@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:47:28 +0100, Eric Buddelmeijer <eric.buddelmeijer_at_elegant.nl> wrote:
> The reason 10g came into play probably is because that is the version that
> supports OS transportability without export/import. Staying with 9.2 means
> IMHO the downtime to do the export/import.

I think that was why we ended up heading off in that direction.

I'm a bit intrigued though - because IIRC exp was dying on the NT box anyway, I'm beginning to wonder about the integrity of the existing database files, given this (maybe wayward) recollection and the corrupt blocks you are getting doing it this way.

-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 10:43:19 CST

Re: Samba and 10g - and NT