RE: 9207 in prod

  • From: "Mercadante, Thomas F \(LABOR\)" <Thomas.Mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <caseydyke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:35:37 -0400

We are using 9207 in both OLTP and warehouse environs.  No problems for

This transmission may contain confidential, proprietary, or privileged 
information which is intended solely for use by the individual or entity to 
whom it is addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that any disclosure, dissemination, copying or distribution of this 
transmission or its attachments is strictly prohibited.  In addition, 
unauthorized access to this transmission may violate federal or State law, 
including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1985.  If you have 
received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by 
return e-mail and delete the transmission and its attachments.

-----Original Message-----

From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 8:53 PM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: fairlie rego
Subject: 9207 in prod


Just trying to get a feel for community comfort w/9207 in prod.  We're
looking to get off 9204 and now have approval to proceed through the
dev/uat/svt and prod envs.  I say 9207 as our initial push occurred
prior to the recent (Aug 24th) release of 9208 for our port (Solaris
64bit).  The databases house OLTP and DW type apps in the multi-TB
range.  Note we're tied to 9iR2 due to vendor support.

We're still early enough in the game to choose 9208 - but 9207 should
likewise be sufficient.  We've got anecdotal evidence of "issues"
w/9207, but nothing really concrete.  Hence, I would like to see what
the broader community thinks.  Good, bad, indifferent ... ??

Any and all input will be greatly appreciated.



Other related posts: