Re: BPCS Sizing Issues

Tony,

In a message dated 98-09-17 15:07:20 EDT, you write:

<<snip>>
> You mentioned in your email that your company will "probably move up".  I am
>  curious to know if your company or any other company out there has had a 
>  similar mis-sizing experience like ours.  If so, how were you able to
resolve 
>  it, or are you still in limbo like us?

This was the source of my earlier warning to "get it in the contract" that SSA
pays if the sizer fails.  My last primary client (over three years ago) was
going to go live with 5.1.01 on a maxed-out "F" 9406 model.  No dice, they
ended up getting one of the first 5xx's shipped -- don't know if even _that_
would have worked, since the company got bought out and the project never went
live.

My current primary client started out on a 2-way 320 -- uuuuuuuuglyyyy.  They
upgraded to a 4-way, which helped, then purchased SMP, which helped more.
Still inadequate though.  They now run a 530 4-way with SMP, and it works
quite well.  DASD was never an issue, though -- the sizer seems to work well
in this area.

If it's not in the contract, limbo or the bank are the only places to go...

JMHO,

Dean Asmussen
Enterprise Systems Consulting, Inc.
Fuquay-Varina, NC  USA
E-Mail:  DAsmussen@aol.com

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please
everybody." -- Bill Cosby (another Bill should take this to heart)
+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---