Re: Anybody recently implemented PRMS 8.4 ?? -- MIDRANGE-L

frank.meaney@nellcorpb.com wrote:

>      Hi Folks,
>
>      I'd like to hear from any one out there who has recently or is in
> the
>      process of Implementing PRMS Version 8.4 from Computer
> Associates.
>
>      One of our clients is midway thru the process of changing the 8.3
>
>      Modifications. I'd like to hear how the implementation went and
> what
>      problems, issues that are relevant.
>
>      Also if any tools were use in the conversion I'd like an opinion
> on
>      those too.
>
>      Contact me direct via the Mailing List or direct at
>
>
>      Frank.Meaney@Nellcorpb.com
>
>
>      P.S. Does anyone know of a PRMS Mailing Group
>           (Is There any interest is starting one ?)
>
>
>      Thanks in advance,
>
>      Frank Meaney.
>      (Unisoft Systems Ltd)
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> david@midrange.com
> +---

  Hi Frank

As my mentor so diligently reminded me :>....yes I am currently involved
with a PRMS upgrade.

We are going from 8.2 to 8.4. Seems fairly straightforward thus far...we
have few modifications
to the software. So far we've tested the data conversion from 8.2 to the
8.3 library...then 8.3 to 8.4...no major problems....no special
tools....we do have some splicing of code to do yet and we should soon
be ready for testing. I'm with a different mfg company now than the one
I got most of my PRMS experience with and thus have only been involved
with this upgrade for a few weeks. I've had a chance to look it all over
and like I said run some data conversions. The biggest problem with that
is getting the files all created with member M001 rather than member
name = file name...other than those few exceptions that are supposed to
be that way. We only process one company number so no need for multiple
members. Good thing too as I don't think
the multiple member aspect is implemented very well throughout the
software.

As you fill out the screens for running the data conversions just
document all the options you use
so when it counts you have all the ducks in a row...Other than a few
files with some bad dates or
bad numeric data the conversions run smooth enough...This company has a
rather small database so it's not a huge job for us.

How is the process going for you ? I'll let ya know if anything special
comes up as we get further
into it. We have to tweak some jobs on the Robot scheduler and we also
gonna try and eliminate the FUSION reports we have by doing them in
query or RPG. We probably have a 2 or 3 weeks of code fixing before our
test environment is ready to go. Possibly longer as I'm not real sure at
this point how much fusion work there is to do.

Best Wishes

--
Jim Welsh
http://www.netcom.com/~jimwelsh/welcome/welcome.html
mailto:jimwelsh@ix.netcom.com


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---