1 2 Previous Next 16 Replies Latest reply: Jan 18, 2010 6:25 AM by ji li RSS

    11g R1 vs 11g R2

    744794
      Hello guys....

      I want to know whether going to 11g R1 prefered or going with 11g R2 is best.

      Can any tell whts the good thing in 11g R2 compare to 11g R1?
        • 1. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
          sb92075
          Can any tell whts the good thing in 11g R2 compare to 11g R1?
          When all else fails, Read The Fine Manual

          http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e10881/toc.htm
          • 2. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
            Nicolas.Gasparotto
            Since 11gR1 is already reaching its last patchset, best to go to 11gR2, just in the beginning of life.

            Nicolas.
            • 3. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
              744794
              Yeah but here is the issue , My company simply dont want to go for 11g R2 . I have to be sure tht I have good advantages or features then I can go for 11g R2. So can you suggest me some.
              • 4. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                EdStevens
                user1420455 wrote:
                Yeah but here is the issue , My company simply dont want to go for 11g R2 . I have to be sure tht I have good advantages or features then I can go for 11g R2. So can you suggest me some.
                So why don't "they" want 11g R2. If you are starting from scratch, why would "they" even consider a release that is already terminal in its life cycle? Before you can address their concerns, you need to know what their concerns are in the first place. Neither you nor we can give answers without knowing what the questions are.
                • 5. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                  ajallen
                  It seems that your company does not understand Oracle releases. Oracle releases are not like M$Word, Windoze, etc. There is no waiting for the first patch release. Oracle releases are all incremental. It is all a numbersname game - forget the numbers, they really matter not - at least since Oracle 6 (or was it 7) when Oracle did a major redesign. Any way, since then it has all been adding on and improving the product, NOT a new product.
                  • 6. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                    ji li
                    Hi ajellen,

                    I'm not so sure I understand what you are saying, and/or if I do, then I might have to disagree.

                    The main release is the first to numbers. e.g., 11.1
                    This means, Version 11, Release 1
                    Then, the next digit is for interim releases (e.g., 7.2.3), and then the forth digit is for patchset releases.

                    Remember that "in theory" (and I regress), the patchset releases are only error correction code and (should) not introduce any new features. Of course, we all know they do, but they are undocumented and not readily available to use.

                    Finally, there are the exceptions. The first one that comes to mind is Oracle Management Server. The OMS came out as Version 10 (actually version 1), but then, release 1 and 2, and then they used the 4th digit to symbolize complete different releases. 10.2.0.1, 10.2.0.2... 10.2.0.5. The final release so far has been 10.2.0.5 which is release 5 with complete new functionality and redesign over previous releases (10.2.0.1 thru 10.2.0.4).

                    Gotta love it! No consistency...
                    • 7. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                      ajallen
                      Oracle releases are a progression that builds on previous releases. The numbers do not matter. 11.1 could just as well be called 10.3, and 11.2 could be called 10.4 for all it matters. We had, for example, bstat/etstat, which evolved into statspack, which evolved into awr. We had imp/exp, which has now evolved into expdp/impdp. This has happened quite a bit as oracle releases have mounted up. There has been no rewrite of the engine, features, or options over time. There has been only evolution and refinement. Yes, when Oracle adds in significant new features it rolls up the number, but that is more a marketing thing to emphasize the latest and greatest product release Oracle 11.1 is more exciting in the market place that 10.3. Not the same, for example with Micro$oft products. They frequently go through complete rewrites or overhauls to where the new product only resembles the prior product on the surface a bit. That is where some managers have a problem. They confuse Oracle releases with some other product releases.
                      • 8. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                        ji li
                        Well, in the respect that Oracle builds on its releases and releases are for marketing reason, to some extent it is true.
                        But at the same time, typically for different releases, Oracle changes things internally, such as writing their code in a different language (e.g., differences between 8.x and 9.x), or with 10G imbedding sqljava.

                        But I think we are saying the same thing. I can tell you that the differences from 9.x to 10.x were much more significant than simply from 10.1 to 10.2 (or 9.1 to 9.2). Again, 11g introduced many new features much more than simply going from 11.1 to 11.2.

                        But, I think it is mostly marketing ploy.

                        Funny though how Oracle deviated from their own rules when they released the different versions of OMS using the forth digit for the actual release version.
                        • 9. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                          Hans Forbrich
                          ji li wrote:
                          Funny though how Oracle deviated from their own rules when they released the different versions of OMS using the forth digit for the actual release version.
                          They started deviating from their own rules the moment the App Server people were allowed to choose a number. And it's getting worse now that WebLogic Server is in the mix - WLS for 11g is 10.3.x.

                          With OMS, the only way to look at it is the OMS has it's own number scheme. The number is not related to database or app server number scheme in any way other than the 10 in 10.2.0.x indicates that it uses OC4J instead of WebLogic Server. (Unless, of course, we are talking about database control, in which case the 11g database control still uses OC4J, but everything in the EM world needs an exception anyway.)
                          • 10. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                            Nicolas.Gasparotto
                            Remember that "in theory" (and I regress), the patchset releases are only error correction code and (should) not introduce any new features. Of course, we all know they do, but they are undocumented and not readily available to use.
                            Again, there is the theory, and the exception : if I'm not wrong the Real Application testing has been introduced (well, backported from 11g) in 10.2.0.4... and is very well documented (sorry, I'm not able to reach the documentation hosted by Oracle doc website to show it).

                            That said, and coming back to the OP's question, the features are one thing, but the support should also be taken in account for all the new project. Knowing the 11gR1 has a very limited life (end of premier support 2012) compared to 11gR2 (end of premier support 2015) , I'll certainly insist on that argument as well. I'm sure the "management" cannot ignore the price of an upgrade in less than two years time.

                            Nicolas.
                            • 11. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                              Nicolas.Gasparotto
                              Hans Forbrich wrote:
                              ...And it's getting worse now that WebLogic Server is in the mix - WLS for 11g is 10.3.x.
                              Speaking about versioning, Weblogic version is a nice pearl indeed.
                              Weblogic 11gR1 is 10.3 whereas Tuxedo 10gR3 is really 10.3... understand who can...

                              Nicolas.
                              • 12. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                                damorgan
                                I must confess a bit of surprise at the advice you have received so far given the sparsity of information you provided.

                                1. Is this for new development or for upgrading an existing application?
                                2. What type of usage? OLTP? DSS? DW?
                                3. What features do you use? RAC? Partitioning? Interested in any of the 11gR2 capabilities?

                                Decisions such as the one you are asking about are best made from a position of having all of the relevant facts: You didn't tell us anything about what you plan to do with it or even the go-live timeframe.

                                From a pure database standpoint there are not a lot of things in 11gR2 that most people can use immediately. But, certainly, by moving to 11gR2 now you make for a clearer path moving forward. My favorite 11gR2 features are Edition Based Redefinition and Hybrid Columnar Compression. The issue with the later being that you must buy an Exadata. Something I would like to do if I had room for one on my lab. <g>
                                • 13. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                                  Nicolas.Gasparotto
                                  Daniel,
                                  damorgan wrote:
                                  I must confess a bit of surprise at the advice you have received so far given the sparsity of information you provided.
                                  I maybe miss something here.
                                  1. Is this for new development or for upgrading an existing application?
                                  2. What type of usage? OLTP? DSS? DW?
                                  3. What features do you use? RAC? Partitioning?
                                  What are the answers make it in favor of 11gR1 or 11gR2 ? Would it mean 11gR2 is less capable on some of these features you're pointing out ?
                                  Decisions such as the one you are asking about are best made from a position of having all of the relevant facts: You didn't tell us anything about what you plan to do with it or even the go-live timeframe.

                                  From a pure database standpoint there are not a lot of things in 11gR2 that most people can use immediately. But, certainly, by moving to 11gR2 now you make for a clearer path moving forward. My favorite 11gR2 features are Edition Based Redefinition and Hybrid Columnar Compression. The issue with the later being that you must buy an Exadata. Something I would like to do if I had room for one on my lab. <g>
                                  Ok, you certainly right by asking questions, but eventually your posistion is not very different than the ones suggested above, going for 11gR2.

                                  Nicolas.
                                  • 14. Re: 11g R1 vs 11g R2
                                    damorgan
                                    Supposed the OP is interested in RAC one-node, or Edition Based Redef, or could potentially use the new analytic functions. Then there is a compelling reason for 11gR2. Suppose they have a commercial product that may be a year away from being certified on 11gR2? Suppose suppose suppose.

                                    You should know from reading my posts I see zero value in running on version in desupport. I am a firm believer in being leading edge but not bleeding edge. That means either 11gR1 or 11gR2 could work. But I would not want to advise one way or the other without knowing what the person intends to do with it. Thus my surprise.
                                    1 2 Previous Next