Jesistar2013
Technical User
Hi All
I recently was asked to look at a new client's Livleink Environment (9.7.1) and when I did I was floored at the number of one-off CORE 9.7.1 patches they had on their system (150+)- not too mention the number of patches for specific modules, plus the necessary hotfixes for their current cumlative (Update5).
Myself having been around now a good 12+ years Administrating and building Livleink environments and having had many conversations with various didfferent people in and outside Open Text about patching methodology I am frustrated once again with the NON-CONCRETE direction on certain CORE one-off patches. I was always told from one of my favorites at Open Text (Kyle S,) not to apply any one-off CORE patches, unless Open Text directed me to do so, or I experienced an issue that one of these patches specifically addressed. I agree and this has always worked well for me. I have kept patching to a minimum which I had to in regulated environments.. I have kept close with the cumlative patches and associated hotfixes - I always went with the approach of patching with the cumlative (3-6 months in arrears unless something specific was addressed or I felt it was a critical cumlative that should be applied to mitigate)I have gone with a hybrid approach (part OT, part my own experiences based on environment). Here is my QUESTIONS for the community.
1. What would you tell a client that obviously went ahead and downloaded and applied every single one-off CORE Livelink Patch (in the 9.7.1 CORE Patches) - regardless if they experienced the issue addressed and who was not directed to by Open Text? Do you have them remove them?
2. What about these patches whose binary files have been updated by other patches (most likely cumlative or other patches)? Need these .pat files anymore and if so does it matter that the current binary files are not the ones originally distributed with these patches.
I have a few choices this I know
1. Upgrade to Content Server 10 with the latest Cumlative and Patch set and start fresh
2. Remove the patches one at a time and test (remove until we are at a managable patch set)
3. Do nothing and continue to remove the patches when I get a Trace that clearly points to the offending patch (which just happened when installing Enterpise Connect newest version)
What do you tell the one guy that asks this question- "Why does Open Text have those patches there if they don't want you to install them" and who didnt like my answer of "not to apply any one-off CORE patches, unless Open Text directed to do so, or experienced an issue that one of these patches specifically addressed"... His response "why isnt that in writing somewhere??" Hmmmmm me: I say well it just isnt or maybe it is but you have to find it somewhere where it shouldnt be... ugh sorry so long but I am tired of this!!!
I recently was asked to look at a new client's Livleink Environment (9.7.1) and when I did I was floored at the number of one-off CORE 9.7.1 patches they had on their system (150+)- not too mention the number of patches for specific modules, plus the necessary hotfixes for their current cumlative (Update5).
Myself having been around now a good 12+ years Administrating and building Livleink environments and having had many conversations with various didfferent people in and outside Open Text about patching methodology I am frustrated once again with the NON-CONCRETE direction on certain CORE one-off patches. I was always told from one of my favorites at Open Text (Kyle S,) not to apply any one-off CORE patches, unless Open Text directed me to do so, or I experienced an issue that one of these patches specifically addressed. I agree and this has always worked well for me. I have kept patching to a minimum which I had to in regulated environments.. I have kept close with the cumlative patches and associated hotfixes - I always went with the approach of patching with the cumlative (3-6 months in arrears unless something specific was addressed or I felt it was a critical cumlative that should be applied to mitigate)I have gone with a hybrid approach (part OT, part my own experiences based on environment). Here is my QUESTIONS for the community.
1. What would you tell a client that obviously went ahead and downloaded and applied every single one-off CORE Livelink Patch (in the 9.7.1 CORE Patches) - regardless if they experienced the issue addressed and who was not directed to by Open Text? Do you have them remove them?
2. What about these patches whose binary files have been updated by other patches (most likely cumlative or other patches)? Need these .pat files anymore and if so does it matter that the current binary files are not the ones originally distributed with these patches.
I have a few choices this I know
1. Upgrade to Content Server 10 with the latest Cumlative and Patch set and start fresh
2. Remove the patches one at a time and test (remove until we are at a managable patch set)
3. Do nothing and continue to remove the patches when I get a Trace that clearly points to the offending patch (which just happened when installing Enterpise Connect newest version)
What do you tell the one guy that asks this question- "Why does Open Text have those patches there if they don't want you to install them" and who didnt like my answer of "not to apply any one-off CORE patches, unless Open Text directed to do so, or experienced an issue that one of these patches specifically addressed"... His response "why isnt that in writing somewhere??" Hmmmmm me: I say well it just isnt or maybe it is but you have to find it somewhere where it shouldnt be... ugh sorry so long but I am tired of this!!!