Is it safe to use locally managed tablespaces in Oracle 9.2.0.2.0.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by stecal
Is it safe? What is this, a throwback to "Marathon Man," when Rod Steiger is torturing Dustin Hoffman? Is it safe? Is it safe?

---

Hi to all moderators,
what utkinpol asked, i always ask too. When i can use a new feature or it is better to stay on the good old ways.
But even the 'old' things surprisingly often do not want to work with the Oracle-Server.
For example the 9.2.0.2-Patch showed about 20 Errors in parallel-query-processing. Has somebody tuned the code or deletetd the comment-lines of Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kernighan, or migrated it to Bjarne Stroustup newest Paradigm's???

I do not know i only know that i understand utkinpol.
Orca
:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jmodic
Yeah, utkinpol, what were the isues with localy managed SYSTEM tablespace in early versions of 9i? I bet your main isue was the fact that you were not able to create SYSTEM as LMT back then! So, was that the reason why you've lost interest in it?

---

It`s quite strange, for the last time I visited this place almost an year ago, but it looks like all you have here now is a gang of stupid tins or a gang of elderly morons who act like a gang of stupid kids.

Who cares what it was? This thing died in several days on staging environment, so who CARES what was it?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Orca777
Hi to all moderators,
what utkinpol asked, i always ask too. When i can use a new feature or it is better to stay on the good old ways.
But even the 'old' things surprisingly often do not want to work with the Oracle-Server.
For example the 9.2.0.2-Patch showed about 20 Errors in parallel-query-processing. Has somebody tuned the code or deletetd the comment-lines of Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kernighan, or migrated it to Bjarne Stroustup newest Paradigm's???

I do not know i only know that i understand utkinpol.
Orca
:cool:

---

I just know that I`m getting paid for my production system which runs 24x7 for more than an year already. And I know that it will be NOT understood by management if this system will start to go down on unpredictable basis, WHATEVER will be the reason. Who cares why it`s down? It`s down. And it`s my job not to let it go there. I just have a certain lack of trust in stability of 9i, it`s just my personal opinion...

It`s a pity to see such a reaction here, anyway.
I`m doing this job for too many ears for now so it does not bother me much, but it`s a pity, anyway. I remebered this place as a good resource to chat with people with professional attitude.
Too bad if it`s not like this anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by utkinpol
It`s quite strange, for the last time I visited this place almost an year ago, but it looks like all you have here now is a gang of stupid tins or a gang of elderly morons who act like a gang of stupid kids.

---

You always have to option of not participating...

Quote:

---

Who cares what it was? This thing died in several days on staging environment, so who CARES what was it?

---

Of course it died. You can't have a LMT SYSTEM tablespace in versions less than 9.2...

Is it safe?
Well If you have "Oracle GOLD" support then I think you may save your job.:D

Oh, come on, utkinpol! The fact is that you made something totaly up from imagination and now you want to sell it as a real life expirience. Do you expect to get a serious answer to a question which is based on an evident lie? Your argument about your question was that "used to have issues with locally managed temporary and SYSTEM tablespaces in early versions of 9i " - and I pointed out that you made that argument up, because you couldn't possibly have SYSTEM as LMT. So do wee need to discuss your original answer any further?

Now about your original question - if you decided to migrate to 9.2, then you need not ask if you should use LMT or not. If you use 9.2 then it is (almost) mandatory to have all your tablespaces as LMT. Is it safe, you ask? Well, I guess about 99.9% of all instalations of 9.2 have all the tablespaces in LMT mode (because very few people know how to create database without being forced to use LMTs in 9.2). So is it safe? Well, if it was not safe there wouldn't be any production instalations of 9.2. It's as simple as that. So is it safe? Yes, it PROBABLY is safe. Is it safer to use DMT with 9.2? You PROBABLY won't find anyone that will be able to answer this, as noone is using DMT in 9.2.

In the future, if you wan't some meaningfull answers to your questions you should at least describe your problems or doubts truthfully.

strange, not fired already

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jmodic
Oh, come on, utkinpol! The fact is that you made something totaly up from imagination and now you want to sell it as a real life expirience. Do you expect to get a serious answer to a question which is based on an evident lie? Your argument about your question was that "used to have issues with locally managed temporary and SYSTEM tablespaces in early versions of 9i " - and I pointed out that you made that argument up, because you couldn't possibly have SYSTEM as LMT. So do wee need to discuss your original answer any further?

Now about your original question - if you decided to migrate to 9.2, then you need not ask if you should use LMT or not. If you use 9.2 then it is (almost) mandatory to have all your tablespaces as LMT. Is it safe, you ask? Well, I guess about 99.9% of all instalations of 9.2 have all the tablespaces in LMT mode (because very few people know how to create database without being forced to use LMTs in 9.2). So is it safe? Well, if it was not safe there wouldn't be any production instalations of 9.2. It's as simple as that. So is it safe? Yes, it PROBABLY is safe. Is it safer to use DMT with 9.2? You PROBABLY won't find anyone that will be able to answer this, as noone is using DMT in 9.2.

In the future, if you wan't some meaningfull answers to your questions you should at least describe your problems or doubts truthfully.

---

All you people have the same teenager`s problem - you read the original message and see not that was written there but something else you decided was there and than start making assumptions instead of further clarification of the issue.

Well, who cares, if according to your opinion R1 is the only earlier version prior to '9.2.0.2 64 bit' - it`s your problem, not mine.

Don`t get me wrong again for a god sake and don`t try to get me any more moronic advices, please.

well if you said what problems you had with so called *earlier* versions of 9i?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pando
well if you said what problems you had with so called *earlier* versions of 9i?

---

don`t give me any more moronic answers, please