RE: Overall BPCS performance

[JALiberty@xxxxxxxxxx]

We are in the process of forming a BPCS UNIX User Group.  Interested?

> ----------
> From:         Hancock, Teri[SMTP:THANCOCK@accuridecorp.com]
> Reply To:     BPCS-L@midrange.com
> Sent:         Thursday, October 08, 1998 4:36 PM
> To:   'BPCS-L@midrange.com'
> Subject:      RE: Overall BPCS performance
> 
> Where might one find a BPCS User Group?  I'm very interested 
> 
> Teri Hancock
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
>       From:   Graziano, Marie [SMTP:mgraziano@badgermeter.com]
>       Sent:   Thursday, October 08, 1998 7:13 AM
>       To:     'BPCS-L@midrange.com'
>       Subject:        RE: Overall BPCS performance
> 
>       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
>       +---
> +---
> | 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
+---