My mistake, when I read "We are running SQL" at the end I assumed you
were running on a SQL database. I know going to another release level
isn't as easy as just saying it, as we are in the process of moving from
6.1 to 8.03.400, but the sooner you can get to the 400 the better. Sorry
I don't have much else at this time.
Toby Boogerd
Information Systems
712-324-4854 x1119
NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and proprietary information
of Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc. By opening any enclosed files, the
recipient agrees not to use, reproduce, disclose, or manufacture its
contents, in whole or in part, without prior written consent of
Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc.
________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of hoomail4me
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 8:41 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: 8.03.5J Upgrade Stability
I would like to but upgrading to .400 is not an option for us at this
time - it could have a negative effect on our implementation time-line.
We are on running on a Progress database so the "direct connection"
you talk of is not of value to us. Can see why this would be of
interest for the SQL crowd though.
Thanks for you input.
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Toby Boogerd" <tboogerd@...> wrote:
Behalf
were running on a SQL database. I know going to another release level
isn't as easy as just saying it, as we are in the process of moving from
6.1 to 8.03.400, but the sooner you can get to the 400 the better. Sorry
I don't have much else at this time.
Toby Boogerd
Information Systems
712-324-4854 x1119
NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and proprietary information
of Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc. By opening any enclosed files, the
recipient agrees not to use, reproduce, disclose, or manufacture its
contents, in whole or in part, without prior written consent of
Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc.
________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of hoomail4me
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 8:41 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: 8.03.5J Upgrade Stability
I would like to but upgrading to .400 is not an option for us at this
time - it could have a negative effect on our implementation time-line.
We are on running on a Progress database so the "direct connection"
you talk of is not of value to us. Can see why this would be of
interest for the SQL crowd though.
Thanks for you input.
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Toby Boogerd" <tboogerd@...> wrote:
>(403b
> I would HIGHLY recommend getting upgraded to the .400 patch level
> is recommended). The system runs a lot better and a lot of performanceinformation
> issues were handled. For example the 400 release runs on .NET 2 and 3
> and also has a direct connection to your SQL database, where before
> Vantage had to parse data through progress to sql.
>
>
>
>
> Toby Boogerd
> Information Systems
> 712-324-4854 x1119
>
> NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and proprietary
> of Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc. By opening any enclosed files, the[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> recipient agrees not to use, reproduce, disclose, or manufacture its
> contents, in whole or in part, without prior written consent of
> Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Behalf
> Of Mark Wagneryou
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 8:18 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: 8.03.5J Upgrade Stability
>
>
>
> Thanks for the reply. We will look at these things as well. Will let
> know what we find<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> , Mark
>
> hoomail4me <hoomail4me@... <mailto:hoomail4me%40yahoo.com> >
> wrote: Don't know if this is the same issue but we are also having
> stability
> problems with Vantage - v8.03.305i
>
> I have spent many hours trying to isolate the problem. A few
> observations...
>
> *** Vantage exits abruptly when accessing various screens that have
> attachments (Job Entry, Part, etc.). No warnings, errors to screen or
> Windows event log. Appserver log just has an entry of the disconnect -
> no detail.
> *** The attachment may or may not have a valid link - doesn't matter.
> Vantge will crash just by the fact that the record has an attachment
> defined. The Epicor TRAIN db has attachments defined but of coarse
> the files don't exist on our network.
> *** No problems with full client - only our Terminal Server clients
> and running the client on our Vantage server.
> *** No problems for users with domain admin permissions, only domain
> users.
> *** Not related to a particular record or database.
> *** Elevating a users permission from domain user to domain admin will
> allow them to access the records with the attachment. Removing domain
> admin permissions from their account will again not allow them to
> access the record without crashing.
> *** I installed Vantage 8.03.305i server on two computers running
> Windows XP - no problems encountered. Seems related to our Windows
> 2003 servers (Terminal Server and Vantage server) and domain
> permissions.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Wagner <mjfw2003@> wrote:<http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com> >
> >
> > Has anyone else upgraded to 8.03.05J? We are experiencing numerous
> system crashes per day due to an overflow of our app servers. It
> appears to be pointing to our part attachments but so far we have not
> been able to confirm. Anyone else experiencing this problem? We are
> running SQL
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com>
> ><http://mail.yahoo.com> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com> <http://mail.yahoo.com
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>