![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
| |||
| |||
|
|
The metric(s) are re-enabled by removing the corresponding line from the collector.properties file. ------------------------------------ End inclusion Did not giving the CSI prevent /oracle/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ ccr/config/default/targets.xml from having your hostname? *Have you checked where ccr.endpoint points to in ccr.properties? *(If I were a bad guy, perhaps that's where I'd go to make your system give me your information. *If I knew how it worked). *How about those funnily named xml files in ccr/state? |
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
Wanna bet? $cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr ksh: /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr: *not found. $ *qed. |
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
Wanna bet? $cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr ksh: /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr: *not found. $ *qed.I will take your bet ... $ cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr $ pwd /u01/app/oracle/product/11.1.0/db_1/ccr |
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mar 4, 11:41*am, joel garry <joel-ga... (AT) home (DOT) com> wrote: Not hardly. *There are presumptions there of equal footing that just don't apply. *It seems apparent Oracle is well aware they can simply wear down anyone who starts chest-thumping about lawsuits. *They _should_ treat us as though we make the rules, but google "fire your customers" which is making the rounds again thanks to Seth Godin. Interesting concept. *And one of the many reasons why we ghave a GFC that everyone knows how to correct and yet no one has been able to fix. *Somewhere in all that there is an element of reality missing... More realistically, there are just so many customers that a few squeaks are a cost of doing business. *Dropped penny? *More likehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAVYYe87b9w Yeah, I know. *But no matter how many companies Oracle buys to offset the lack of growth in DB business, there will be soon a day where reality will catch up. You bet. *And I can also make my next support payment dependent on Oracle changing their attitude. As Rocky would say to Bullwinkle "that trick never works." *Bullwinkle usually pulls out something likehttp://1.bp.blogspot.com/_F3F2-KgbhTc/SWAl_9WnUxI/AAAAAAAAAvM/ESUslxK... LOL! But I suppose it's a nice dream. One that'll cost them a coupla hundred grand a year. And that's just one customer... ![]() |
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mar 5, 12:51*am, John Hurley <johnbhur... (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote: Oracle used to sell separate upgrade licensing and support licensing, back in the pre-6 days. Guess why they bundled both into a single licence? * ![]() I wonder if anyone ever tested the legality under common law of them doing so... |
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mar 4, 9:52 pm, Noons <wizofo... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote: snip Wanna bet? $cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr ksh: /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr: not found. $ qed.I will take your bet ... $ cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr $ pwd /u01/app/oracle/product/11.1.0/db_1/ccr |

#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
I bet that was Noons' situation after 'the installing part', but he combined 'the configuration and the using part' into one statement: rm -rf /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr |
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
Wanna bet? $cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr ksh: /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr: not found. $ qed.I will take your bet ... $ cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr $ pwd /u01/app/oracle/product/11.1.0/db_1/ccr Here is my last 10.2.0.4 system ... $ pwd /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr $ ll -ltr total 56 -rw-r--r-- 1 oracle oinstall 23331 Dec 17 2007 README.TXT ... ( lines deleted ) |
#29
| |||
| |||
|
|
John Hurley wrote: On Mar 4, 9:52 pm, Noons <wizofo... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote: snip Wanna bet? $cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr ksh: /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr: not found. $ qed.I will take your bet ... $ cd $ORACLE_HOME/ccr $ pwd /u01/app/oracle/product/11.1.0/db_1/ccr I bet that was Noons' situation after 'the installing part', but he combined 'the configuration and the using part' into one statement: rm -rf /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/ccr ![]() |
#30
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mar 4, 6:52 pm, Noons <wizofo... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote: On Mar 5, 12:51 am, John Hurley <johnbhur... (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote: Oracle used to sell separate upgrade licensing and support licensing, back in the pre-6 days. Guess why they bundled both into a single licence? ![]() I wonder if anyone ever tested the legality under common law of them doing so... Which law would that be? http://www.ipinfoblog.com/archives/l...rinciples.html |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |