That looks right to me. If you're going to patch everything no matter what,
then I don't see a reason to run utltzuv2.sql unless you're just curious.
On 1/31/07, Barbara Baker <barb.baker_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Oracle 10.1.0.3 Solaris 9
>
>
> Mark and Tom:
>
> I have several 10.1.0.3 databases with no possibility of upgrading.
>
> I wonder if I might prevail on you to review these steps and let me know
> if this is what you did to upgrade your timezones for a 10.1.0.3 database
>
>
>
> 1. Downloaded patch 5126270, manually placed the timezdif.csv in
> $ORACLE_HOME/oracore/zoneinfo and ran utltzuv2.sql
> 2. After step 1, I do not appear to have affected data, nor do I
> have Java issues
> 3. I downloaded patch 4689959 for 10.1.0.4
> 4. I plan to manually move the timezlrg.dat and timezone.dat files
> to $ORACLEl_HOME/oracore/zoneinfo
>
>
>
> Does this sound correct?
>
> I've downloaded about a bazillion metalink articles, and I'm still
> struggling.
>
> Thanks for any help!
>
> Barb
>
>
>
>
> On 1/30/07, Mark Strickland <strickland.mark_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I just realized that on one of my dev/test servers, Oracle was never
> > upgraded from 10.1.0.3 to 10.1.0.5 (egg on face). There is no DST patch
> > for 10.1.0.3 but I compared the old versions of the timezone files
> > between the two patchsets and they are identical so I copied the new
> > timezone files from 10.1.0.5 to 10.1.0.3 and called it good. The test
> > query does return the correct time. I don't like doing spur-of-the-moment
> > upgrades and this particular server and database are expected to be
> > sunsetted sometime this century, so I decided not to quickly upgrade it. I
> > may decide to do that later.
> >
> > So, if you have 10.1.0.3 and can't upgrade to a higher 10gR1 patchset,
> > there appears to be a workaround. If I encounter side-effects, I'll be sure
> > to update the list.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mark Strickland
> >
>
>
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Wed Jan 31 2007 - 11:10:42 CST
