Best Of

Re: 2026 U.S. FEDERAL WITHHOLDING TAX CHANGES

The seven tax rates (10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35%, 37%) remain the same as prior years, but the income thresholds increase for inflation is not in the patch, which we noticed yesterday. I believe the 2026 Standard Deduction Amounts for 2026 are Single / Married Filing Separately: $16,100, Married Filing Jointly / Surviving Spouse: $32,200, and Head of Household: $24,150. We are hoping they will be in December 19th or 23rd patch and the patch information will be on the new AI portal.

Bill Grafton

1

Re: Request Date update for Subcontracting PO routing

Yes i am different result when Updated the Requested Date on the routing step in the Work Order Routing (P3112). The Purchase order requested date is not getting updated.

User_GPO3F

1

Re: Request Date update for Subcontracting PO routing

Hello,

I tested the issue in our latest 9.2 environment in two ways:

Updated the Requested Date in the Work Order header (P48013), and blanked out Planned Effective and Start Dates. This updated the routing request dates and also the related Purchase Order Requested Date.
Updated the Requested Date on the routing step in the Work Order Routing (P3112). This also updated the Purchase Order Requested Date.

Are you seeing different results? If so, please do not hesitate to create a service request so that we can investigate.

Eric

Ericd-Oracle

1

Re: Where have my bookmarks in Knowledge gone??

So it seems the old favorites have been finally recovered and can be exported, although without any folder organization.

(…Go to Account → Preferences → Previous Favorites to view your previous Knowledge Articles favorites.)

PaoloM

2

Re: Where have my bookmarks in Knowledge gone??

Looks like there is hope, but mine are currently blank.

Maybe they are still importing them over.

Andy Clark

2

Re: Move order associated to WO

Thanks a lot SriniS.

User_PV028

1

Re: Is there a possibility to mix SA and registration?

Daureen

just for INVITE methods only , did u try to use session-constraint of a child realm ?

I mean , create a outgoing child realm , basically the same of the parent that send outgoing Register requests from the SBC to provider where endpoint registers , then create a local-policy specific for the trunk calling number , configure policy-attribute with the child-realm with the same next-hop of the parent realm , then apply constraint on child realm .

This is a working scenario for a peering environment , just test if it applies also on this specific case too .

Cheers

Antonio

Antonio Scilimati

1

Is it acceptable or possible that Oracle the big database company doesn't have any rollback plan for

Seriously we're over a week now and still the issue is not getting any better!!!

Is it acceptable or possible that Oracle the big database company doesn't have any rollback plan for such failure?!!

Is it thinkable or come to our minds that Oracle the big database company selling migration services to worldwide customers doesn't know how to fix its own migration failure?!!!

This is not normal failure. This is not one or two or even some bunch of mistakes or features missing, it's the whole support site failing and not functioning at all. It's a complete disaster!!! Is there any possibility that Oracle run the migration without having any kind of rollback plan?!!

I really can't get it

Unless Oracle made it intentionally and they really want the support portal to be only a site to keep raising service requests without any real added value from searching, downloading, fixing, patching and finding solutions!!!

I seriously can't get it

Mahmoud Eltanbouly

1

In search of ORA-3113—or how the new Support Portal ruined the Knowledge Base

First there are the search results.

Far fewer results fit in the screen than in legacy MOS
Relevancy does not seem improved at all
Each link is now followed by a few lines of excerpt—or was that an attempt at summarizing? In any case, it's worthless, and it wastes space which should be used for displaying search results.

Screenshot - 12_14_2025 , 1_01_22 PM.png

Please note how the title of each KB article was carefully crafted by KB technical writers, so that they would be concise, accurate, and yet convey enough information for KB users to decide, just upon reading the title, whether the article would be worth reading, or relevant for their task or not. This is exactly why the lines of excerpt/summary/whatever are absolutely unnecessary.

And then there's how KB articles are formatted in the new Redwood stylesheet.

To illustrate this disaster, I'll take the example of (KB164954) Primary Note: Troubleshooting steps for ORA-03113 Error (formerly known as MOS Doc ID 1506805.1)

If I remember correctly, "troubleshooting steps" notes used to be interactive documents aimed at guiding the reader through a decision tree-like procedure. They contained internal links, and sometimes even dynamic content.

As such, that document is now almost unusable, due broken links and extremely poor formatting.