Oninit cdi / Archive
Talk to an expert →

Re: DST - Engine bounce required?

Posted in 2007

Topics: Stored Procedures & SPL, Server Administration, Platform-Specific Issues, Java & JDBC Development, Versions, Editions & End-of-Life

Andrew Ford — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

IDS 10.00.UC5 - Linux RHEL3 2.4.21-27.ELsmp > Anyone else having this issue? > >> date > Sun Mar 11 10:30:43 CDT 2007 > >> print -- "select current from systables where tabid = 1" | dbaccess >> sysmaster 2>/dev/null > > > (expression) > > 2007-03-11 09:31:52.000 > > > My engines that were bounced recently do not have this problem. > > I read the alert posted by IBM > http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?fdsp=imids&rs=64&uid=swg21248851 > and determined that since I am not using Java stored procedures that no > action was required. > > Did I misread this alert? Should I have proactively bounced my instances? > > Thanks, > > Andrew >

↪ replying to Andrew Ford
Madison Pruet — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Andrew Ford wrote: > IDS 10.00.UC5 - Linux RHEL3 2.4.21-27.ELsmp > > >> Anyone else having this issue? >> >>> date >> Sun Mar 11 10:30:43 CDT 2007 >> >>> print -- "select current from systables where tabid = 1" | dbaccess >>> sysmaster 2>/dev/null >> >> (expression) >> >> 2007-03-11 09:31:52.000 >> >> >> My engines that were bounced recently do not have this problem. Were those engines also 10.UC5? >> >> I read the alert posted by IBM >> http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?fdsp=imids&rs=64&uid=swg21248851 >> and determined that since I am not using Java stored procedures that no >> action was required. >> >> Did I misread this alert? Should I have proactively bounced my instances? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Andrew >> > >

↪ replying to Madison Pruet
Andrew Ford — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Yes, all engines 10.00.UC5 and running the same OS/Kernel. Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Madison Pruet" <mpruet@tx.rr.com> Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix To: "Andrew Ford" <aford@networkip.net> Cc: <informix-list@iiug.org> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:50 PM Subject: Re: DST - Engine bounce required? > Andrew Ford wrote: >> IDS 10.00.UC5 - Linux RHEL3 2.4.21-27.ELsmp >> >> >>> Anyone else having this issue? >>> >>>> date >>> Sun Mar 11 10:30:43 CDT 2007 >>> >>>> print -- "select current from systables where tabid = 1" | dbaccess >>>> sysmaster 2>/dev/null >>> >>> (expression) >>> >>> 2007-03-11 09:31:52.000 >>> >>> >>> My engines that were bounced recently do not have this problem. > > Were those engines also 10.UC5? > >>> >>> I read the alert posted by IBM >>> http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?fdsp=imids&rs=64&uid=swg21248851 >>> and determined that since I am not using Java stored procedures that no >>> action was required. >>> >>> Did I misread this alert? Should I have proactively bounced my >>> instances? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Andrew >>> >> >> > >

↪ replying to Andrew Ford
david@smooth1.co.uk — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

On 11 Mar, 22:24, "Andrew Ford" <a...@networkip.net> wrote: > Yes, all engines 10.00.UC5 and running the same OS/Kernel. > > Andrew > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Madison Pruet" <mpr...@tx.rr.com> > > Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix > To: "Andrew Ford" <a...@networkip.net> > Cc: <informix-l...@iiug.org> > Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:50 PM > Subject: Re: DST - Engine bounce required? > > > Andrew Ford wrote: > >> IDS 10.00.UC5 - Linux RHEL3 2.4.21-27.ELsmp > > >>> Anyone else having this issue? > > >>>> date > >>> Sun Mar 11 10:30:43 CDT 2007 > > >>>> print -- "select current from systables where tabid = 1" | dbaccess > >>>> sysmaster 2>/dev/null > > >>> (expression) > > >>> 2007-03-11 09:31:52.000 > > >>> My engines that were bounced recently do not have this problem. > > > Were those engines also 10.UC5? > > >>> I read the alert posted by IBM > >>>http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?fdsp=imids&rs=64&uid=swg21248851 > >>> and determined that since I am not using Java stored procedures that no > >>> action was required. > > >>> Did I misread this alert? Should I have proactively bounced my > >>> instances? > Was an OS patch applied to fix the DST issue? Did it mean libc shared libaries? You probably find that the oninit process still has an old version of the OS shared libraries mapped into it's address space and that the OS patch says that applications using these shared libraries need to be restarted or that a reboot is required. Does anyone know what the Redhat DST patches say in their notes about application restarts/reboots? > >>> Thanks, > > >>> Andrew- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -

↪ replying to david@smooth1.co.uk
Andrew Ford — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

David, I think you are right. http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_79_9950 "Once updated, a restart of all the applications relying on /etc/localtime is required. The easiest solution would be to reboot the machine in order to ensure that all the applications are properly updated." I guess that would include Informix, duh. Thanks for the help, Andrew > On 11 Mar, 22:24, "Andrew Ford" <a...@networkip.net> wrote: >> Yes, all engines 10.00.UC5 and running the same OS/Kernel. >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Madison Pruet" <mpr...@tx.rr.com> >> >> Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix >> To: "Andrew Ford" <a...@networkip.net> >> Cc: <informix-l...@iiug.org> >> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:50 PM >> Subject: Re: DST - Engine bounce required? >> >> > Andrew Ford wrote: >> >> IDS 10.00.UC5 - Linux RHEL3 2.4.21-27.ELsmp >> >> >>> Anyone else having this issue? >> >> >>>> date >> >>> Sun Mar 11 10:30:43 CDT 2007 >> >> >>>> print -- "select current from systables where tabid = 1" | dbaccess >> >>>> sysmaster 2>/dev/null >> >> >>> (expression) >> >> >>> 2007-03-11 09:31:52.000 >> >> >>> My engines that were bounced recently do not have this problem. >> >> > Were those engines also 10.UC5? >> >> >>> I read the alert posted by IBM >> >>>http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?fdsp=imids&rs=64&uid=swg21248851 >> >>> and determined that since I am not using Java stored procedures that >> >>> no >> >>> action was required. >> >> >>> Did I misread this alert? Should I have proactively bounced my >> >>> instances? >> > > Was an OS patch applied to fix the DST issue? Did it mean libc > shared libaries? > > You probably find that the oninit process still has an old version > of the OS shared libraries mapped into it's address space > and that the OS patch says that applications using these shared > libraries need to be restarted or that a reboot is required. > > Does anyone know what the Redhat DST patches say in their notes > about application restarts/reboots? > >> >>> Thanks, >> >> >>> Andrew- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list

Glossary