[THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
- From: "Braebaum, Neil" <Neil.Braebaum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 16:02:09 -0000
Comments inline...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Schneider, Chad M
> Sent: 04 November 2004 15:59
> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
>
> And here is why I asked.....
>
> Since deploying those hotfixes, per Citrix, my resource
> manager is flaky. When trying to view server log for Summary
> Database...."Resource Manager could not read the oldest
> Server Log file."
>
> My load evaluators on several servers show nothing....0.0%.
> Ummm....no.
>
> Now I have reactively/proactively patched, and may have fixed
> one thing...but apparently broke something else....
Which is *exactly* why the official recommendations have always been to
always only apply *hotfixes* when you are experiencing the fault.
Neil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Braebaum, Neil
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:46 AM
> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
>
> Hey, for a while, I probably would have thought the same -
> proactively do it, and stay current.
>
> I tried that years ago.
>
> Then got my fingers burnt with *service packs* never mind hotfixes.
>
> Automatic updates like Windows update are a different matter,
> but now, apart from security stuff, I'd only ever apply
> hotfixes if they addressed issues that I was encountering -
> or likely to.
>
> I've never been entirely convinced with the concept of
> roll-up hotfix packages - just strikes me it's taken too long
> between service packs, and they've got too many hotfixes that
> have been succeeded.
>
> Neil
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf Of John Hardwick
> > Sent: 04 November 2004 15:40
> > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> >
> >
> > The speal that I received from Citrix support a couple of
> days ago...
> > as I've always been the one to proactively patch instead of
> > reactively... was that all of the hotfixes are tested and
> developed in
> > a Base product
> > + that one fix environment. They are not tested as a
> > combined product.
> >
> >
> > I made the same point about the recent Ctx rollup patch and
> was met by
> > silence by the Citrix rep.
> >
> > I haven't had any problems with a fully patched MF 3.0 server.
> >
> > Other than the usual random Citrix bugs that keep the support folks
> > employed.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf Of Braebaum, Neil
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:07 AM
> > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> >
> > As to which documentation - I'm not sure without looking. But then
> > having it written "authoritatively" in a document is not
> something I
> > need.
> >
> > However, I've definitely read it from Citrix sources as well as
> > Microsoft.
> >
> > As to the service pack thing, that is a different matter.
> >
> > By the time a service pack has come along, all the included
> fixes are
> > *meant* to be ratified, and *meant* to not cause issues
> cumulatively,
> > or known problems.
> >
> > Hotfixes by their very nature (I mean look at the word
> > itself) are meant to be specific fixes for specific
> problems, used in
> > an interim basis, before a ratified service pack comes along.
> >
> > Security patches that might be critical updates from Windows update
> > are another matter - but it's quite rash to just apply hotfixes to
> > stay current - unless you definitely have a need for them.
> >
> > Neil
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > On Behalf Of Jeff Durbin
> > > Sent: 04 November 2004 14:57
> > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > >
> > > Which Citrix documentation? It seems odd that this would be a
> > > recommendation, because hotfixes are eventually wrapped up in a
> > > service pack which, at least in the case of Microsoft, is
> > > universally recommended.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > On Behalf Of Braebaum, Neil
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 3:09 AM
> > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > > >
> > > > I've seen this written in both Citrix's documentation, and
> > > > Microsoft's before now.
> > > >
> > > > FWIW, it's always been considered "best practices".
> > > >
> > > > Neil
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Jeff Durbin
> > > > > Sent: 04 November 2004 03:59
> > > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd be interested in that. Can you ask them if they've
> > > > documented that
> > > > > somewhere as a formal recommdendation? Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Schneider, Chad M
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 7:52 PM
> > > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > > > >
> > > > > I will have to talk with a Couple Citrix SE's, who just
> > at iForum,
> > > > > restated not to install a patch, unless a specific
> item you are
> > > > > experiencing, is fixed with that patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the input.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Jeff Durbin
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:43 PM
> > > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > > > >
> > > > > I work for the 2003 Citrix North American partner of the
> > > > year and all
> > > > > the Senior Consultants in the Citrix practice had this
> > > discussion a
> > > > > few weeks ago. We all agreed that our position is to
> fully patch
> > > > > MetaFrame with the latest Citrix service pack and hotfixes.
> > > > We don't
> > > > > take this stance with Microsoft operating systems, however.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Schneider, Chad M
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 6:52 AM
> > > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > > > >
> > > > > I also know, per Citrix, that unless you see an issue, that
> > > > is noted
> > > > > in a patch, to not apply the patch. Citrix SE's have made
> > > > it clear to
> > > > > not apply hotfixes, just because they are available.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Jeff Durbin
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 8:48 AM
> > > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [THIN] Re: Hotfixes...
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm a firm believer in proactive patching. Patches are
> > issued to
> > > > > correct flaws in the code, so I always prefer to have code
> > > > that is as
> > > > > bug free as possible, rather than wait to encounter the
> > > problem and
> > > > > find the fix. If you had had all the Citrix patches
> > > applied to your
> > > > > server(s), you wouldn't have seen the issue or had to
> > > deal with the
> > > > > problem at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Schneider, Chad M
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 6:09 AM
> > > > > To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [THIN] Hotfixes...
> > > > >
> > > > > Due to an apparent zone communication issue, I finally
> > > > called Citrix
> > > > > Tech support.
> > > > > That was Thurs. night. I then called them back on Mon.
> > morning.
> > > > > They suggested, first thing, hotfixes 126, 119 and 082.
> > > > How does the
> > > > > group feel about these fixes? Any thoughts at all are
> > > appreciated.
***********************************************
This e-mail and its attachments are confidential
and are intended for the above named recipient
only. If this has come to you in error, please
notify the sender immediately and delete this
e-mail from your system.
You must take no action based on this, nor must
you copy or disclose it or any part of its contents
to any person or organisation.
Statements and opinions contained in this email may
not necessarily represent those of Littlewoods.
Please note that e-mail communications may be monitored.
The registered office of Littlewoods Limited and its
subsidiaries is 100 Old Hall Street, Liverpool, L70 1AB.
Registered number of Littlewoods Limited is 262152.
************************************************
********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor Emergent Online ThinCity Conference
Join us at ThinCity 2004: The 1st Annual Emergent OnLine Technology Conference
http://www.ThinCity.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
Other related posts:
