Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: rjamya <rjamya@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Mladen Gogala <mgogala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:54:57 -0400
That's not the point, Oracle states in Metalink note 3663846.8 proclaiming
that it is fixed in 10.1.0.4 <http://10.1.0.4> and is isn't. This works in
9ir2 but broke sometime in 10g. Can you spell regression?
Raj
On 6/29/05, Mladen Gogala <mgogala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> rjamya wrote:
>
> > One thing we found on 10.1.0.4 <http://10.1.0.4> <http://10.1.0.4> is
> large pl/sql
> > blocks don't compile. They fail with pls-123 Program too large error.
> > I am currently working on creating a test case for Support, since the
> > bug was closed as fixed in 10.1.0.4 <http://10.1.0.4> <http://10.1.0.4>.
> Ha !!
> >
> > Raj
> >
> One way of fixing this would be to make a recommendation not to use
> large PL/SQL blocks.
> That wouldn't be the first time that the problem is solved on the
> marketing level.
>
> --
> Mladen Gogala
> Oracle DBA
> Ext. 121
>
>
>
--
------------------------------
select standard_disclaimer from company_requirements where category =
'MANDATORY';
- References:
- RE: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: Jesse, Rich
- Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: rjamya
- Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: Mladen Gogala
Other related posts:
- » 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- » RE: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- » RE: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- » Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- » Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- » Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- RE: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: Jesse, Rich
- Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: rjamya
- Re: 10.1.0.4 patchset 2 catcpu.sql slop
- From: Mladen Gogala