Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-15-2010 , 11:54 AM
John Hurley wrote:
Know a way to find the known bugs for 10.2.0.5?
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 12:48 AM
On Sep 15, 11:17*pm, John Hurley <hurleyjo... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:
with ASSM and a few CBO and query result-set issues. If you want, I
can get you the actual bug numbers, they are in our Opatch mini-
I'm not paid to install patches to Oracle, I'm paid to provide
reliable database resources that run no matter what.
What we run on them is our business applications, and those have
priority. Not the database. The business aplications only require
From past experience, the quickest way to throw out the reliability of
an Oracle installation is to install every dot patch that Oracle
Unreliable services mean we're out of a job.
So far, we've been able to provide 100% - not 99.99, not "4 9s". 100%
= 0 (zero) unsheduled outage - in 12 instances supporting a wide
variety of consolidated production and dev/test environments of DW,
Hyperion, Peoplesoft, SOA/OSB, Apex and Forms applications over a
period of nearly 4 years.
Of course: that level of service delivery must be because we don't
know what we're doing.
In simple terms: if it's not broken, it is meeting the SLA *and* you
do not need new db functionality, do NOT touch it.
Don't blame me, blame Oracle: it's their software, I don't write it.
And I most certainly refuse to QA it for them, for free and at the
expense of my professional delivery and reputation.
CPUs are primarily security patches. We don't have a security
No, I don't care what "security experts" claim:
we get independently security audited twice a year and so far no one
has been able to poke through or find fault; those are the facts our
performance is measured upon.
Not hypothetical "web site" scenarios.
(How many commercial sites do you know of that audit security that
PSU's are too recent for me to form an opinion on them and anyway most
do not apply to 10.2.0.3. And quite frankly: Oracle's "patch releases"
mean nothing to me given their past history of instability.
Like I said: I'm paid to provide a reliable db service. Not Oracle
This is not a software house or IT services company. We run a business
that has nothing to do with software making: it just uses it. And my
job is to make sure we use it to the most.
I also back my claims with independent external audits which have
never found a flaw in any of our processes, in the nearly 4 years I've
Not being condescending or anything, just stating the facts.
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 12:59 AM
On Sep 16, 2:52*am, "Gerard H. Pille" <g... (AT) skynet (DOT) be> wrote:
frankly: buffer busy waits get pretty old, after a while!
Just joking, you got a nasty bug. Hope you find the fix. I know it's
fixed in 2.0.3.
I like to spend my time fixing bad SQL and bad design rather than
patching bugs. IME, I get orders of magnitude performance improvement
by fixing a really bad SQL or PL/SQL section of code than by patching
up for bugs here, there and everywhere. To give you a measure of what
I'm talking about: our DW produced 100GB od redo logs daily when I
started here. And around 1TB/day of reads. In a server that had 100%
CPU usage for nearly 22 hours/day.
Now it pumps out 500GB of redo log, around 5TB/day of reads and rarely
if ever goes over 30% CPU usage. Most of it due to improvements to
SQL and PL/SQL, rather than major patches or release upgrades. I'm
happy with that!
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 06:59 AM
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 00:45:00 -0700, Noons wrote:
to make things easier to distinguish, just think of Jessica Simpson.
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 11:31 AM
On Sep 15, 10:48*pm, Noons <wizofo... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
as well run as yours, especially when "the business" makes technical
decisions, with cost considerations overriding implicit requirements
for stability and uptime. My hat's off to your management, it's
expensive to do it right, it's tough to find a Noons to entrust with
It shows how difficult it is to advise strategy in general. Oracle
must both follow and lead the "market," Dilbertesque as it may be.
Individual companies must make their own decisions within a broad
range of possibilities, some self-contradictory.
@home.com is bogus.
To the moon, Larry! To the moon! http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-20016586-239.html
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 12:50 PM
On Sep 16, 6:31*pm, joel garry <joel-ga... (AT) home (DOT) com> wrote:
"it's expensive to do it right"
It's always less expensive to do it right first time than to screw up
and make it right afterwards.
Or even worse: have to hire someone from outside to do so.
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 03:45 PM
is on 10.2.0.4 currently.
Just interested in clearing up the terminology for ( not too likely
given how dead cdos is these days ) other people.
Hey fine it was just curiousity given how ( a while back now )
relatively stable 10.2.0.4 was for us. That was back on hpux though
and hey we are out of there now.
Running stuff on aix must be a little interesting these days with
patches/etc given how Oracle is yo yo'ing between linux and solaris.
Used to be solaris and hpux maintenance came out timely and pretty
well tested ... used to be. Solaris maintenance may now be back on
the upswing ... time will tell.
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 04:26 PM
On Sep 16, 10:50*am, The Boss <nlt... (AT) baasbovenbaas (DOT) demon.nl> wrote:
management support and good strategic vision. http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2010-09-16/
@home.com is bogus.
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 05:40 PM
I was talking about 10.2.0.5 for aix and any issues related to that
specific platform. The correct Oracle support analyst can help you
chase those down if you can get the correct one. Probably an aix
specific knowledge base article that you can chase down.
Re: known bugs in 10.2.0.1 on aix 64bit - 09-16-2010 , 10:58 PM
On Sep 17, 6:45*am, John Hurley <hurleyjo... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:
But it's a good platform and the new Power6 chips are absolute
I love that i570 we got now: with the lpar virtual partitioning and
the hypervisor on top, it's so easy to re-config on the fly it's not
even funny. We got so much stuff on it now it's mind-blowing.
Starting now to use AIX 6 on micro-lpars, which are even better.
Basically, all our Oracle servers hang off that beast, with a few app
servers thrown in and two AS400 servers in there as well!