RE: SAP

Jeff,

Do you recall the R/3 release that your employer was using?  We started our
implementation around the same time on 4.0B.  Most consultants recommended
that we implement 3.1H or 3.1I because that was what everyone knew.  We
performed a "do-it-yourself" implementation and did our initial learning on
4.0B, upgraded to 4.5B when we started customization and went live with
4.6B.  4.0B was stable, although we did have a few problems.  4.5B and 4.6B
have been very stable.  Around the start of 2002 there were over 1,000 live
installations of R/3 on OS/400.

A bit of trivia:  Rumor has it that R/3 was originally developed on a system
known as "Silverlake", but the platform did not have sufficient power at the
time and R/3 development was moved to Unix.

Regards,
Stan

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Bull [mailto:Jeff.Bull@itm-group.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, 06 January, 2003 8:36 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: SAP


At a former place of employment ... in 1999 ... a project was started to
migrate off the non-2K compliant version of BPICS and onto SAP.  The AS/400
version of the SAP-server was fairly new, full of bugs, there were only a
very few other users of our version, and performance was dreadful. 

This was the only time I have ever advised to dump an AS/400 - dumping SAP
was NOT an option.  Within six weeks Compaq servers were installed and
running the SAP instances very effectively.

We had tried just about everything else before this action.  The SAP
database, which was journalled, had created over 100 access paths over some
files - a nightmare.  This was a few years ago, so I hope things have
improved - I quite liked the application side of things.

Jeff Bull