Tim Gorman wrote: >Oracle software isn't truly ready for production usage until it becomes >desupported. When they stop making changes, it's ready. > > Speaking of that, has anyone noticed the absence of Mr. Peter R. Sharman? He is usually very kind and quick to clarify Oracle policies. I must say that I am frightened of all those bugs which can yield a wrong result or result in an instance termination. Is it just me or Oracle has scrapped QA to reduce cost? Some of the 9.2.0.6 bugs on Linux unequivocally show that Oracle is sharing the burden of regression testing with its esteemed customers: 4063079 <http://updates.oracle.com/ARULink/PatchDetails/process_form?patch_num=4063079&release=8092060&plat_lang=46P&email=mgogala%40allegientsystems.com&userid=MGOGALA&;> RDBMS Server: Patch [LINUX RAC] APPLYING PSR 9.2.0.6 INSTALLS OLDER VERSION CLUSTER MANAGER (ORACM) 3119415 <http://updates.oracle.com/ARULink/PatchDetails/process_form?patch_num=3119415&release=8092060&plat_lang=46P&email=mgogala%40allegientsystems.com&userid=MGOGALA&;> RDBMS Server: Patch INS_OEMAGENT.MK IS NOT USING THE GLIBC STUBS 3984255 <http://updates.oracle.com/ARULink/PatchDetails/process_form?patch_num=3984255&release=8092060&plat_lang=46P&email=mgogala%40allegientsystems.com&userid=MGOGALA&;> Oracle Database Family: Patch APPSST9206: OH/LIB/LIBCXA.SO.3 MISSING IN INSTALLATION OF 9206 The only possible conclusion after seeing these bugs is that Oracle doesn't really care what is packaged in their software releases. There are missing libraries, make files, wrong versions etc. Even the most rudimentary QA would catch those problems. Wouldn't it be better to just open-source the product? A bunch of college kids might do better job testing and it would certainly cut costs. Tim, I agree with you that the only safe products from Oracle Corp. are the ones that are no longer supported. May the force be with noble souls who have put 10g in production. -- Mladen Gogala Oracle DBA Ext. 121 -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
