RE: 9.2.0.2 / 9.2.04 -- was RE: updating singly sys packages
- From: "Jamadagni, Rajendra" <Rajendra.Jamadagni@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:19:27 -0500
In baseline versions of 9204 there was a bug that would throw 600s if you run
select 'A' from dual order by 1
/
There is a patch to fix that ... (and we have that installed too) We basically
upgraded one of RAC instances to 9204 to take advantages for big fixes related
to CLOBs, XML, AQ related stuff ... nothing else.
Raj
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com
All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal.
select standard_disclaimer from company_requirements;
QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Hemant K Chitale
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:27 PM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: 9.2.0.2 / 9.2.04 -- was RE: updating singly sys packages
Robert,
Raj's question was to Juan about why he, Juan, wanted the 9.2.0.4 utl_file
specifically.
Like Raj, I too am running some 9.2.0.2 instances, one 9.2.0.2 RAC. All
newer 9i instances
at my site are 9.2.0.4 [with two patches].
I have found 9.2.0.2 stable enough not to just "MUST upgrade ASAP".
Running multiple versions and patchset levels is sometimes a requirement
when you
need 24x7 and cannot afford downtime.
Hemant
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
