Forward Finite Scheduling

Thank you, for awhile I was beginning to think we are the only ones, which would lead to a configuration or data problem. We have been working with Phil at tech support. We have this issue in the line up for develpment to review.

Â



________________________________
From: "sharonwoodall56@..." <sharonwoodall56@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 9:39:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling

Â
We are having the exact problem. I think they have submitted a SCR to development for this. Been working with Warren and Scott at tech support.
By the way we are on 408B as well.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Lou Laird <loulrd@yahoo. com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:19:40
To: <vantage@yahoogroups .com>
Subject: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling

Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and schedule at a later date.

[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]
Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and schedule at a later date.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We are having the exact problem. I think they have submitted a SCR to development for this. Been working with Warren and Scott at tech support.
By the way we are on 408B as well.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Lou Laird <loulrd@...>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:19:40
To: <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling

Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and schedule at a later date.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I recall during piloting a few years ago on one of the 305's, we observed this behavior (even for jobs scheduled into our infinite capacity, high velocity, assemble to order resources). Jumping to 403 resolved it.

We run Global scheduling (finite in our machine shop resources with all jobs being forward scheduled & carrying various scheduling priority multipliers via preset scheduling codes) on 405a - & while it has major bugs unresolved a year+ after reporting them (to Warren) & being a promised a fix (that never materialized) on 408 - I've never seen the behavior you describe on 403-405a.

Tying into the 'reasons to upgrade' thread (sorry Kerry: I typed 'Dawn' when seconding your wise stance to only upgrade when compelling reasons exist) - This is an example of why we don't blindly upgrade unless there is a truly compelling reason. (Each release seems to bring new bugs to deal with - often as many as it supposedly resolves - and often the 'fixes' are for things not impacting our process use of the system - but the new bugs ARE when we do initial testing assessment of whether to adopt the new release).

RobÂ




________________________________
From: Lou Laird <loulrd@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 8:19:40 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling

Â
Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and schedule at a later date.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Rob, what ver are you on now? What global scheduling bugs have you identified? The other issue we saw was when rescheduling a job with a subcontract operation which has a PO linked to it, the days out is ignored, there is a fix which isn't coming out until 410 release.
Lou



________________________________
From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, November 17, 2009 1:01:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling (& tie in to Reasons to Upgrade thread)

Â
I recall during piloting a few years ago on one of the 305's, we observed this behavior (even for jobs scheduled into our infinite capacity, high velocity, assemble to order resources). Jumping to 403 resolved it.

We run Global scheduling (finite in our machine shop resources with all jobs being forward scheduled & carrying various scheduling priority multipliers via preset scheduling codes) on 405a - & while it has major bugs unresolved a year+ after reporting them (to Warren) & being a promised a fix (that never materialized) on 408 - I've never seen the behavior you describe on 403-405a.

Tying into the 'reasons to upgrade' thread (sorry Kerry: I typed 'Dawn' when seconding your wise stance to only upgrade when compelling reasons exist) - This is an example of why we don't blindly upgrade unless there is a truly compelling reason. (Each release seems to bring new bugs to deal with - often as many as it supposedly resolves - and often the 'fixes' are for things not impacting our process use of the system - but the new bugs ARE when we do initial testing assessment of whether to adopt the new release).

RobÂ

____________ _________ _________ __
From: Lou Laird <loulrd@yahoo. com>
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 8:19:40 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling

Â
Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and schedule at a later date.

[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]
Lou,
We're on 405a & run MRP & Global nightly as recurring tasks.
404 (where global was split into 3 app process of Calc Global Sched order, adjust (which we don't do as our shed codes - each w/ a specific priority multiplier & adjusted by planners thru-out day - give a good sched order) Sched Order & Global) revealed immediately long standing bug of Calc Sched order using as-sched due date (versus entered fixed job Req'd date) - meaning you could run 3 step process repeatedly (during a time when no activity is reported, jobs changed by planners, new jobs entered or WIP jobs rcv'd) - would give you 3 different schedules as use of wrong date made it based on prior sched versus planned/wanted sched.
We reported to Vantage fully documented (along with our own SQL fix of temp swapping Due w/ Req'd) & Epicor leveraged our fix into fixed code by 404c.
Still existing is a random, widespread (impacting 30-40 pct jobs on any given night) is no respect for finish to start relationship of our OPs.
It can sneekily result (for ex) in OP 50 scheduled to start before OP 20. (It'll break defined seq at any OP - but only 1 per affected job & subsequent OPs return to respecting spec'd sequence.) Blatant ones have last OP (out of up to 20 but typically about 8 per job) starting before 1st - with job then showing DUE before job Start.
Reported it a year ago & Warren at support promised resolution in 408 (which was released months later than original est).
Took a single test install & global run to find bug still exists.
I suppose we'll test 409 nxt month when released but not holding our breath.
We also experience your issue with subcontract offset days (when linked PO exists). Many systems I've used or seen struggle with this one. It's annoying (but relative to larger problem with Op sequencing being broken) I can live with it as most of our subcontract services are out 2-5 days max.
Rob

--- Original Message ---
From:"Lou Laird" <loulrd@...>
Sent:Tue 11/17/09 8:24 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling (& tie in to Reasons to Upgrade thread)

Rob, what ver are you on now? What global scheduling bugs have you identified? The other issue we saw was when rescheduling a job with a subcontract operation which has a PO linked to it, the days out is ignored, there is a fix which isn't coming out until 410 release.
Lou



________________________________
From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, November 17, 2009 1:01:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling (& tie in to Reasons to Upgrade thread)

Â
I recall during piloting a few years ago on one of the 305's, we observed this behavior (even for jobs scheduled into our infinite capacity, high velocity, assemble to order resources). Jumping to 403 resolved it.

We run Global scheduling (finite in our machine shop resources with all jobs being forward scheduled & carrying various scheduling priority multipliers via preset scheduling codes) on 405a - & while it has major bugs unresolved a year+ after reporting them (to Warren) & being a promised a fix (that never materialized) on 408 - I've never seen the behavior you describe on 403-405a.

Tying into the 'reasons to upgrade' thread (sorry Kerry: I typed 'Dawn' when seconding your wise stance to only upgrade when compelling reasons exist) - This is an example of why we don't blindly upgrade unless there is a truly compelling reason. (Each release seems to bring new bugs to deal with - often as many as it supposedly resolves - and often the 'fixes' are for things not impacting our process use of the system - but the new bugs ARE when we do initial testing assessment of whether to adopt the new release).

RobÂ

____________ _________ _________ __
From: Lou Laird <loulrd@yahoo. com>
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 8:19:40 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling

Â
Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and schedule at a later date.

[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]
That's interesting that you are experiencing those finish to start
issues Rob. We aren't seeing any of that here. The scheduling engine
is far from being robust as is should, I still do have issues with how
calculate runs, but with our aggressive use of priority codes it has
become...workable. Another user posted on here earlier about operations
skipping open capacity, and we do see that crop up from time to time on
a smaller percentage of jobs, more so on zero level jobs than not, but
this has to this point for us been more of an annoyance than anything,
we usually mop these up by a crystal report we use to monitor
manufacturing critical path time to ensure our velocity is where we want
it.



Rob Bucek

Manufacturing Engineer

PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 3111

FAX: (715)284-4084

<http://www.dsmfg.com/>

(Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>





From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of robertb_versa@...
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:17 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling (& tie in to Reasons to
Upgrade thread)





Lou,
We're on 405a & run MRP & Global nightly as recurring tasks.
404 (where global was split into 3 app process of Calc Global Sched
order, adjust (which we don't do as our shed codes - each w/ a specific
priority multiplier & adjusted by planners thru-out day - give a good
sched order) Sched Order & Global) revealed immediately long standing
bug of Calc Sched order using as-sched due date (versus entered fixed
job Req'd date) - meaning you could run 3 step process repeatedly
(during a time when no activity is reported, jobs changed by planners,
new jobs entered or WIP jobs rcv'd) - would give you 3 different
schedules as use of wrong date made it based on prior sched versus
planned/wanted sched.
We reported to Vantage fully documented (along with our own SQL fix of
temp swapping Due w/ Req'd) & Epicor leveraged our fix into fixed code
by 404c.
Still existing is a random, widespread (impacting 30-40 pct jobs on any
given night) is no respect for finish to start relationship of our OPs.
It can sneekily result (for ex) in OP 50 scheduled to start before OP
20. (It'll break defined seq at any OP - but only 1 per affected job &
subsequent OPs return to respecting spec'd sequence.) Blatant ones have
last OP (out of up to 20 but typically about 8 per job) starting before
1st - with job then showing DUE before job Start.
Reported it a year ago & Warren at support promised resolution in 408
(which was released months later than original est).
Took a single test install & global run to find bug still exists.
I suppose we'll test 409 nxt month when released but not holding our
breath.
We also experience your issue with subcontract offset days (when linked
PO exists). Many systems I've used or seen struggle with this one. It's
annoying (but relative to larger problem with Op sequencing being
broken) I can live with it as most of our subcontract services are out
2-5 days max.
Rob

--- Original Message ---
From:"Lou Laird" <loulrd@... <mailto:loulrd%40yahoo.com> >
Sent:Tue 11/17/09 8:24 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subj:Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling (& tie in to Reasons to
Upgrade thread)

Rob, what ver are you on now? What global scheduling bugs have you
identified? The other issue we saw was when rescheduling a job with a
subcontract operation which has a PO linked to it, the days out is
ignored, there is a fix which isn't coming out until 410 release.
Lou

________________________________
From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...
<mailto:robertb_versa%40yahoo.com> >
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, November 17, 2009 1:01:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling (& tie in to Reasons to
Upgrade thread)


I recall during piloting a few years ago on one of the 305's, we
observed this behavior (even for jobs scheduled into our infinite
capacity, high velocity, assemble to order resources). Jumping to 403
resolved it.

We run Global scheduling (finite in our machine shop resources with all
jobs being forward scheduled & carrying various scheduling priority
multipliers via preset scheduling codes) on 405a - & while it has major
bugs unresolved a year+ after reporting them (to Warren) & being a
promised a fix (that never materialized) on 408 - I've never seen the
behavior you describe on 403-405a.

Tying into the 'reasons to upgrade' thread (sorry Kerry: I typed 'Dawn'
when seconding your wise stance to only upgrade when compelling reasons
exist) - This is an example of why we don't blindly upgrade unless there
is a truly compelling reason. (Each release seems to bring new bugs to
deal with - often as many as it supposedly resolves - and often the
'fixes' are for things not impacting our process use of the system - but
the new bugs ARE when we do initial testing assessment of whether to
adopt the new release).

Rob

____________ _________ _________ __
From: Lou Laird <loulrd@yahoo. com>
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 8:19:40 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Forward Finite Scheduling


Ver, 8.03.408B
Is anyone using forward finite scheduling for one job at a time, and not
running global scheduling?

Are you having any problems?

We are experiencing the job will skip over available capacity and
schedule at a later date.

[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]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]