CFR With Multiple Pathcodes - Split the config Tables?

[DJH]

Hi everybody

My Post is regarding CFR Auditing... I have set this up a few times previously only 9.2 systems and I have never had any issues using Multiple Pathcodes. I have never before separated the system config tables.

I am about to do this again on 2 systems, both 9.2 Tools Release with 9.2 Apps.

I see the recommended approach in the documentation is to split the config and use different 'A' Table names per pathcode. I am now thinking whether I need to use this approach or not, and I would like to get other peoples opinions on whether it is needed or not? Other CNCs I have spoken to have also never split the tables per pathcode and have never had an issue.

The systems in question are both OCI, with Oracle 12C DB, using TR9.2.2.4, on Apps 9.2 Update 2.

Thanks in advance for any replies

 

[habarric]

Question 4: Can auditing be enabled on multiple pathcodes simultaneously in tools release prior to 9.1.4.x?
Auditing in multiple pathcode is supported starting from tools release 9.1.4.x (i.e, PY910 and PD910 ). Prior to this tools release, auditing is NOT supported on multiple pathcode. This is due to design issues identified by our development team. Also, when auditing is enabled on a specific pathcode, the audit setup has to be copied to all environments that share that particular pathcode. For details please refer to JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools Auditing Administration Including 21 CFR Part 11 Administration Guide

NOTE:
Development confirmed that it is not possible to back-port the fix to 8.98.x or tools release prior to 9.1.4.x.
Auditing is not Supported for System Tables in Multiple Pathcodes.This is due to the limitation in the CFR11 code.