Re: 9207 in prod

From: fairlie rego <fairlie_r_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20060914024045.40415.qmail@web31906.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hi Casey,    

  Somebody in Oracle support once jokingly mentioned that the even numbered patchsets were more stable than the odd numbered ones.   Not sure if that had much credence but I know a couple of things that broke after applying the 9.2.0.7 patchset.    

  You might want to have a look at the following   Note 308895.1 on ML which talks about all the known issues with the 9.2.0.7 patchset    

  Note:388281.1 on ML which talks about all the known issues with the 9.2.0.8   patchset
  and take your pick...    

  HTH,
  Fairlie

caseydyke_at_optusnet.com.au wrote:
  Folks,

Just trying to get a feel for community comfort w/9207 in prod. We're looking to get off 9204 and now have approval to proceed through the dev/uat/svt and prod envs. I say 9207 as our initial push occurred prior to the recent (Aug 24th) release of 9208 for our port (Solaris 64bit). The databases house OLTP and DW type apps in the multi-TB range. Note we're tied to 9iR2 due to vendor support.

We're still early enough in the game to choose 9208 - but 9207 should likewise be sufficient. We've got anecdotal evidence of "issues" w/9207, but nothing really concrete. Hence, I would like to see what the broader community thinks. Good, bad, indifferent ... ??

Any and all input will be greatly appreciated.

Thx,

Casey
--

http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

          Fairlie Rego
Senior Oracle Consultant   

  http://el-caro.blogspot.com/
  M: +61 402 792 405                      

---

Do you Yahoo!?
 Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
--

http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Wed Sep 13 2006 - 21:40:45 CDT