Jack wrote:
> "DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:41db8f14$1_3_at_127.0.0.1...
>
>>Jack wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>One DBA takes one day to upgrade a system. And most of that time is the
>>>>computer churning away while the DBA surfs the web. But to be generous 7
>>>>days of which DBAs time costs many tens of thousands of dollars? And if
>>>>you find that guy I want his job.
>>>>
>>>>And yes testing is required. But still the worst case scenario is a
>>>>financial break-even every time I've costed it out.
>>>>--
>>>>Daniel A. Morgan
>>>>University of Washington
>>>>damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
>>>>(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>>>
>>>
>>>Daniel you are talking about theories.
>>>In real life there are several databases, different operating systems,
>>>new harware etc.
>>
>>In real life you are correct. But does it take me more time to upgrade a
>>Solaris database today, one on HP/UX tomorrow, on AIX on Thursday, and
>>one on Windows on Friday? I sure hope not. Nope: 4 databases ... 4 days.
>>And if you have an environment such as this ... even more reason to keep
>>current with versions so that you are running on a supported platform.
>>--
>>Daniel A. Morgan
>>University of Washington
>>damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
>>(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>
>
> Jep, it is so sipmle.
> And after that someboby must do: a one-month gig/database
>
> In this case it takes 4 months.
The size of a database is close to irrelevant to applying a patch or
upgrade to a more recent version. To what are you making reference?
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Wed Jan 05 2005 - 11:55:49 CST
