Re: Performance problem reporting (was: About BPCS V6.1.01 MM)

["Genyphyr Novak" <novakg@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi ,

We do publish known program performance problems. They are called 'D'
priority BMRs, and they are listed on OGS Online for all supported BPCS
releases just as soon as they are reported by either a client or an internal
tester. We also worked with IBM to publish the IBM Redbook on BPCS, as I
mentioned in my prior posting,  with entire chapters devoted to setting up
the product and the AS/400 in order to
optimize performance on that platform. If a BMR workaround exists (such as a
logical file), it is published on OGS. If the BMR has been fixed, you can
order it from Helpline. If the BMR is not fixed, you can escalate it via the
OGS Online forms. You can search the OGS BMRs for a specific release by the
priority code and get a full listing this way. OGS was recently updated with
a new user interface search engine and underlying database, so if you have
not tried to search for BMRs lately, I suggest you go out and try it now.

If a customer does not tell us of a problem they find, or notify us
of a logical that improves performance for a specific application, or if the
problem is not discovered via testing internally - then no BMR is written,
and when you call Helpline and ask "Are there any known performance issues
with xyz?" then, surely they will have no way to be aware of the problem.

If someone does their own corrections and never gives feedback to SSA R&D
via working with Helpline to ensure a new BMR is entered, then this is
potentially perpetuating the problem into the next release - unless another
customer
happens to also run across it and does the work to report it to SSA Helpline
at a later date.

If you know of a performance problem in a particular
base BPCS program, and know that a specific new logical helps, then you
should call the SSA AS/400 Technical Helpline and report the
application steps which cause the performance problem, as well as your
workaround for it (the new logical you built) as a 'D' BMR so that others
with
the same release and set up for that program can benefit from your
experience, and so that the problem is resolved in future releases (thus if
you upgrade, you won't have to re-do any of your custom logical files).

Be prepared to provide detailed information to help us analyze the
problem. The AS/400 or Unix Teams of the Technical Helpline can explain what
sort of information is
required and
how to send it in to SSA. The R&D department will
analyze the information and will decide if the slow program's SQL should be
altered so that an existing logical is used, or if the new logical should be
put into BPCS permanently via a BMR deliverable or if the problem is not in
the SQL at all, but lies elsewhere. In the case you mention, since you found
a logical
file helped, then SQL access was the problem. However, it is not the cause
for
every performance problem.

(Note that if your version of the program is modified, as per usual, you
will be asked to produce the same problem in a vanilla BPCS environment
before the BMR can be entered against base BPCS in order to prove the
modification is not influencing the problem).

If you feel you are not getting proper Helpline attention for your problem,
feel free to ask the consultant to transfer you to a support manager.

Thanks

Genyphyr Novak
SSA Global Technologies


-----Original Message-----
From: Graziano, Marie <mgraziano@badgermeter.com>
To: 'BPCS-L@midrange.com' <BPCS-L@midrange.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 7:46 PM
Subject: RE: About BPCS V6.1.01 MM


>Well that is ok to call SSA.  But we have proven out our logicals.  When we
>called Helpline noone had any answers.  IF SSA is aware of performance
>problems, then they should publish them.  We had our invoicing go from 8+
>hours down to 45 minutes with our inhouse logical.  SSA cant beat that!
> Thanks for the update. We will stick with our inhouse logicals
>
>Marie Graziano
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: Genyphyr Novak [mailto:novakg@ssax.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 1:05 PM
>To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
>Subject: Re: About BPCS V6.1.01 MM
>
>Hi Marie,
>
>Just to set the record straight on what is/is not GUI in Mixed Mode release
>6.1.00 versus 6.0.04:
>
>In V6.0.04 BPCS, CEA (financials), OLM (Outbound Logistics Management) and
>COM (Configurable Orders) are all GUI-only applications. There is however,
a
>green-screen version of Order Entry available for this release.
>
>At V6.1.00 and up, only OLM and CEA are GUI for the 'Fat Client' part of
the
>Mixed Mode. All the other programs are Green Screen. (ie, there is no
longer
>a 'COM' Fat Client application available).
>
>Also, I suggest not using 'cookie cutter' logicals from any random 'list'
>you find on this mailing list or someone's web site. Firstly, 6.1.00 has
>many performance improvements, including several more performance-specific
>logicals than did 6.0.04, and secondly, depending upon how you have set up
>BPCS and the data skew in your files, you may not need all the logicals
>someone else does, and may in fact require different ones. No need to add
>overhead to the system and make it update logical access paths that are
>never used by anything.
>
>At some point, it is good practice for all shops to performance tune their
>systems (via DBMON or a tool such as Centerfield Technologies sell) to add
>logicals as required. Many companies do this themselves, while others hire
>consultants such as SSA Services or IBM to perform this task for them.
>Specific application problems should be reported to the SSA Helpline to see
>if a BMR is available, or if a BMR should be entered. Logical files are NOT
>the answer to every program's performance problem.
>
>As Peter pointed out, the IBM Redbook on Implementing BPCS is a very good
>starting point to read up on BPCS performance, how to set up your system
and
>the rest. It was written with BPCS version 6.1.00 in mind.
>
>Thanks
>
>Genyphyr Novak
>SSA
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Graziano, Marie <mgraziano@badgermeter.com>
>To: 'BPCS-L@midrange.com' <BPCS-L@midrange.com>
>Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 7:40 AM
>Subject: RE: About BPCS V6.1.01 MM
>
>
>>We are on 6.0.04 mixed mode.  The only part that is GUI is the General
>>Ledger.  Anything you can do for yourself is to make sure that you have
the
>>logicals this list has been talking about.  Performance suffers if you do
>>not have the logicals built over the ECL ECH Etc.
>>
>>Marie Graziano
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Jorge Torres [mailto:jtorres@cosapisoft.com.pe]
>>Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 6:10 PM
>>To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
>>Subject: About BPCS V6.1.01 MM
>>
>>Is someone using BPCS V6.1.01 or V6.1.00 Mixed Mode? Can you talk about
>your
>>experience on it?. The company I work for is planning to upgrade from
>>V6.0.02 MM. We are not prepared to go to full C/S because of too many dumb
>>terminals in use.
>>
>>Thanks, Jorge





+---
| 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
+---