RE: Overall BPCS performance -- BPCS-L

Vince:

Yes this is an issue with many many BPCS 6.x users.  I will tell you that if
you do a prtsqlinf over the program you will see that the sql statements are
many and complex.  It will also tell you if it had to build paths.  If it
did, then create a logical for the criteria.   
Per BPCS SSA saying no one has this problem is nuts.  They are aware of the
slowwwwwwness.  If you belong to a local BPCS users group use that avenue to
get SSA to respond.  

BYW-  are you mixed mode??

                -----Original Message-----
                From:   Vince Rowe [mailto:vrowe@zeus.odyssey.net]
                Sent:   Wednesday, October 07, 1998 7:02 PM
                To:     BPCS-L@midrange.com
                Subject:        Re: Overall BPCS performance

                At 07:41 PM 10/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
                >Has anyone addressed their overall system performance
decline since going to
                >BPCS 6.x.  When we talk with them they try to indicated
that we are the only
                >one addressing these types of problems.  (Which I know is
not true).
                >
                Here's our sad tale:  2+ years ago we started to implement
BPCS 5.x.x on a
                nice little 310 AS/400.  Of course we had to move to 6.x.x,
and over the
                years we've landed on 6.0.2 PLF mixed mode March Cum.  Over
a year ago we
                actually got COM to function and discovered to our dismay
that a one line
                order took 20 minutes to confirm with no one else on the
box.  Well, the
                cure was a 510 w/ 728M of memory and 60G of DASD.  We're
supposed to go
                live in 3 weeks and decided to do a stress test w/ 10 CS
people or so doing
                order entry at 3 sites and a few others (trying) to do
various tasks that
                would ordinarily be required to run a business.  Back to the
20 minute
                scenerio w/ COM timing out on two out of three tries; simple
GreenScreen
                Material Status lookups took minutes; forget getting
anything to print; and
                the box was pegged for an hour *after* we completed our 1
hour test,
                finishing up some 65 left over jobs..........When we got the
510, it was
                the biggest box IBM made.  My question is:  can IBM make a
machine that is
                up to the punishment BPCS hands out?  Yes, we've had tuning
specialist here
                and our BPCS consultants have remarked that our machine is
the fastest
                responding they've ever used.  

                You are not alone.

                Vince Rowe
                vrowe@odyssey.net
                Marietta Corporation
                Cortland, NY
                +---
                | 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
                +---
+---
| 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
+---