Mass Operation Replace

Yahoo Archive
1
Dave,

Support strikes again although I'll give them style points this time for saying more than "working as designed".

The functionality they CLAIM is intended is pretty useless (wouldn't you agree)?

They just screwed up (to give sales a deceptive sell point) and it's low priority and are basically conceding they have no plans to fix it.

I've yet to use SC but it seems kind of lame that you'd have to by an add on (that is poorly documented), write & debug your own workflow & then develop a way to manage and control its use.

Frankly, if it was that simple, they'd already have done it and included it in the base product with a very limited run time version of the SC elements required (in my opinion - much like in the way they support the EDI add-on).

Are you SQL server or Progress? If SQL server, you might be able to just do a SQL update (before you go live - do a full backup 1st in case it screws things up!).

If your Progress, you'd probably need the added cost import templates to make sure all the right tables are being touched and updated.


Wish I could have helped more.

Rob


________________________________
From: moldboy <dave_c_fullerton@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:38:11 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Mass Operation Replace





Rob,
Well, I did not receive the answer that I was hoping for. Per Epicor
Support, Mass Operations Replace has never been intended to do more than
replace the operation code. The tie to the costing Resource Group does
need to be entered manually. Upon visiting the fact that an operation is
no more than a code, description and a costing link and that not
replacing the description could have some merit, it would actually make
a great tool if you didn't have to drag the affected parts down into
Engineering Workbench to add the Resource Group as, in some cases could
run into thousands of parts. And of course you would have to touch them
all. Well they suggested Service Connect would be a better tool in that
case however we haven't had the time to investigate that. I've heard
good things and bad on SC but I after all that I've read, I'm a
proponent to give it a go especially for the less complicated tasks.
They also said that some of them have been lobbying to get rid of Mass
Op Replace due to it's limited functionality. I did note that it could
be used in a test environment to determine what parts are tied to a
specific operation as it does give a report at the end of the process.
He agreed and mentioned that perhaps it should be turned into strictly a
query tool.
Thanks again for your insight.
Best regards,
Dave Fullerton
--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "moldboy" <dave_c_fullerton@ ...> wrote:
>
> Robert,
> Thank you for your insight. I will contact Epicor support as this
could
> be a very useful tool when functioning correctly.
> Kind regards,
> Dave
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown robertb_versa@ wrote:
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > We're a year live on 405a (after going live on 404 with no plans to
> upgrade until AT LEAST 408 when a critical global scheduling SCR is
> scheduled to be fixed... just nothing compelling thru latest 407 to
make
> it worthy of investing the month of testing to find all the new bugs,
> changed behavior that may not be desireable & to verify all
> customizations still work ).
> >
> > When piloting (305-403C), we found the Mass Operation Replace
function
> so woefully (and dangerously) inadequate we disabled it. At least on
403
> it DID bring over new resource groups or resources specified in the
new
> Std OP. (Somewhat frightening that on 407 it fails to even do this.)
> However, it would wipe out (set up & cycle times in the methods it
> replaced OPs in - setting cycle times to zero even though the costing
> system & the global scheduler do not handle zero time OPs at all
well).
> It also would wipe out any method specific Operation memos.
> >
> > My suggestion is that you at least contact Epicor support (and
perhaps
> they WILL find some missed step as they review the procesx with you).
At
> the very least that may lead to an SCR and eventual fix.
> >
> > Until then, I suggest you do not use it. As you pointed out, a
couple
> hundred methods to edit is not an awful chore (particularly when
facing
> a go live deadline).
> >
> > Rob
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________ _________ _________ __
> > From: moldboy dave_c_fullerton@
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
> > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 10:49:33 PM
> > Subject: [Vantage] Mass Operation Replace
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > We are almost at Go Live with 1 1/2 weeks to go. We've just done one
> of
> > our last conversions and found a bum operation due to a an input
> error.
> > I had accidentally tied a resource instead of a resource group to an
> op.
> > This caused a sequencing error that would not allow costs to roll.
The
> > only way I thought of to fix this was to create a replacement
> operation
> > tied to the original resource group then do a mass operation
replace.
> > This seemed to work fine except that when we tried to roll the
costs,
> we
> > didn't receive any from the operation. We found that the resource
> group
> > that the operation was tied to didn't make the trip over (blank) so
> > again, no costs. I tried a new op but to the same result. The
location
> > box is checked on the resource group to allow labor reporting. I
feel
> > that I must be missing something because why would we have a Mass
> > Operation Replace if you still have to check out each individual
part
> to
> > tie the resource group to (?). It's only 200+ parts we need to fix
so
> > it's not a huge deal however I'm puzzled. Ideas? We're at 8.03.407.
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Dave Fullerton
> > Die Cast Engineering Supervisor
> > Le Sueur Incorporated
> > Le Sueur, MN
> > dave_c_fullerton@ lesueurinc. com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Is there a procedure similar to the mass operation replace that will
allow me to "get rid of" a certain operation out of every bom
without having to go into each and every one? Can I simply just
delete the operation itself in the master?

My production manager years ago set up a HAN (handling) operation
for packaging. When we went into Vantage, on of the owners set up a
PAK1 operation for outside customers and PAK2 operation for our
sister company onsite, which is basically all bulk packaging. When
we started reentering boms, HAN was supossed to be replaced with PAK
1 or 2. Well.......instead, on a majority of them they were just
added to the bom instead of replacing HAN.
Hence the reason I dont want to just replace HAN with one of my
packaging operations, because its all ready in there on a different
operation......

Any suggestions guys? Please?
I am on 5.0.348 (Dont even ask lol)

Thanks!

Michelle V.
Office Manager
Advance Engineering Corp.
3
Hi Michelle,

Parts are supposed to be linked to an operation and I believe that's why
they didn't give you a "mass delete operation" option. If there is a way to
do it I would like to know how. I'm also on 5.0 so don't feel so bad.

Fredy Venczel


-----Original Message-----
From: shells_v [SMTP:mevb@...]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 3:31 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Mass Operation Replace

Is there a procedure similar to the mass operation replace that will

allow me to "get rid of" a certain operation out of every bom
without having to go into each and every one? Can I simply just
delete the operation itself in the master?

My production manager years ago set up a HAN (handling) operation
for packaging. When we went into Vantage, on of the owners set up a
PAK1 operation for outside customers and PAK2 operation for our
sister company onsite, which is basically all bulk packaging. When
we started reentering boms, HAN was supossed to be replaced with PAK

1 or 2. Well.......instead, on a majority of them they were just
added to the bom instead of replacing HAN.
Hence the reason I dont want to just replace HAN with one of my
packaging operations, because its all ready in there on a different
operation......

Any suggestions guys? Please?
I am on 5.0.348 (Dont even ask lol)

Thanks!

Michelle V.
Office Manager
Advance Engineering Corp.
4
We are almost at Go Live with 1 1/2 weeks to go. We've just done one of
our last conversions and found a bum operation due to a an input error.
I had accidentally tied a resource instead of a resource group to an op.
This caused a sequencing error that would not allow costs to roll. The
only way I thought of to fix this was to create a replacement operation
tied to the original resource group then do a mass operation replace.
This seemed to work fine except that when we tried to roll the costs, we
didn't receive any from the operation. We found that the resource group
that the operation was tied to didn't make the trip over (blank) so
again, no costs. I tried a new op but to the same result. The location
box is checked on the resource group to allow labor reporting. I feel
that I must be missing something because why would we have a Mass
Operation Replace if you still have to check out each individual part to
tie the resource group to (?). It's only 200+ parts we need to fix so
it's not a huge deal however I'm puzzled. Ideas? We're at 8.03.407.
Thanks in advance,
Dave Fullerton
Die Cast Engineering Supervisor
Le Sueur Incorporated
Le Sueur, MN
dave_c_fullerton@...
5
Dave,

We're a year live on 405a (after going live on 404 with no plans to upgrade until AT LEAST 408 when a critical global scheduling SCR is scheduled to be fixed... just nothing compelling thru latest 407 to make it worthy of investing the month of testing to find all the new bugs, changed behavior that may not be desireable & to verify all customizations still work ).

When piloting (305-403C), we found the Mass Operation Replace function so woefully (and dangerously) inadequate we disabled it. At least on 403 it DID bring over new resource groups or resources specified in the new Std OP. (Somewhat frightening that on 407 it fails to even do this.) However, it would wipe out (set up & cycle times in the methods it replaced OPs in - setting cycle times to zero even though the costing system & the global scheduler do not handle zero time OPs at all well). It also would wipe out any method specific Operation memos.

My suggestion is that you at least contact Epicor support (and perhaps they WILL find some missed step as they review the procesx with you). At the very least that may lead to an SCR and eventual fix.

Until then, I suggest you do not use it. As you pointed out, a couple hundred methods to edit is not an awful chore (particularly when facing a go live deadline).

Rob




________________________________
From: moldboy <dave_c_fullerton@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 10:49:33 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Mass Operation Replace





We are almost at Go Live with 1 1/2 weeks to go. We've just done one of
our last conversions and found a bum operation due to a an input error.
I had accidentally tied a resource instead of a resource group to an op.
This caused a sequencing error that would not allow costs to roll. The
only way I thought of to fix this was to create a replacement operation
tied to the original resource group then do a mass operation replace.
This seemed to work fine except that when we tried to roll the costs, we
didn't receive any from the operation. We found that the resource group
that the operation was tied to didn't make the trip over (blank) so
again, no costs. I tried a new op but to the same result. The location
box is checked on the resource group to allow labor reporting. I feel
that I must be missing something because why would we have a Mass
Operation Replace if you still have to check out each individual part to
tie the resource group to (?). It's only 200+ parts we need to fix so
it's not a huge deal however I'm puzzled. Ideas? We're at 8.03.407.
Thanks in advance,
Dave Fullerton
Die Cast Engineering Supervisor
Le Sueur Incorporated
Le Sueur, MN
dave_c_fullerton@ lesueurinc. com







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
Robert,
Thank you for your insight. I will contact Epicor support as this could
be a very useful tool when functioning correctly.
Kind regards,
Dave
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> We're a year live on 405a (after going live on 404 with no plans to
upgrade until AT LEAST 408 when a critical global scheduling SCR is
scheduled to be fixed... just nothing compelling thru latest 407 to make
it worthy of investing the month of testing to find all the new bugs,
changed behavior that may not be desireable & to verify all
customizations still work ).
>
> When piloting (305-403C), we found the Mass Operation Replace function
so woefully (and dangerously) inadequate we disabled it. At least on 403
it DID bring over new resource groups or resources specified in the new
Std OP. (Somewhat frightening that on 407 it fails to even do this.)
However, it would wipe out (set up & cycle times in the methods it
replaced OPs in - setting cycle times to zero even though the costing
system & the global scheduler do not handle zero time OPs at all well).
It also would wipe out any method specific Operation memos.
>
> My suggestion is that you at least contact Epicor support (and perhaps
they WILL find some missed step as they review the procesx with you). At
the very least that may lead to an SCR and eventual fix.
>
> Until then, I suggest you do not use it. As you pointed out, a couple
hundred methods to edit is not an awful chore (particularly when facing
a go live deadline).
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: moldboy dave_c_fullerton@...
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 10:49:33 PM
> Subject: [Vantage] Mass Operation Replace
>
>
>
>
>
> We are almost at Go Live with 1 1/2 weeks to go. We've just done one
of
> our last conversions and found a bum operation due to a an input
error.
> I had accidentally tied a resource instead of a resource group to an
op.
> This caused a sequencing error that would not allow costs to roll. The
> only way I thought of to fix this was to create a replacement
operation
> tied to the original resource group then do a mass operation replace.
> This seemed to work fine except that when we tried to roll the costs,
we
> didn't receive any from the operation. We found that the resource
group
> that the operation was tied to didn't make the trip over (blank) so
> again, no costs. I tried a new op but to the same result. The location
> box is checked on the resource group to allow labor reporting. I feel
> that I must be missing something because why would we have a Mass
> Operation Replace if you still have to check out each individual part
to
> tie the resource group to (?). It's only 200+ parts we need to fix so
> it's not a huge deal however I'm puzzled. Ideas? We're at 8.03.407.
> Thanks in advance,
> Dave Fullerton
> Die Cast Engineering Supervisor
> Le Sueur Incorporated
> Le Sueur, MN
> dave_c_fullerton@ lesueurinc. com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
7
Rob,
Well, I did not receive the answer that I was hoping for. Per Epicor
Support, Mass Operations Replace has never been intended to do more than
replace the operation code. The tie to the costing Resource Group does
need to be entered manually. Upon visiting the fact that an operation is
no more than a code, description and a costing link and that not
replacing the description could have some merit, it would actually make
a great tool if you didn't have to drag the affected parts down into
Engineering Workbench to add the Resource Group as, in some cases could
run into thousands of parts. And of course you would have to touch them
all. Well they suggested Service Connect would be a better tool in that
case however we haven't had the time to investigate that. I've heard
good things and bad on SC but I after all that I've read, I'm a
proponent to give it a go especially for the less complicated tasks.
They also said that some of them have been lobbying to get rid of Mass
Op Replace due to it's limited functionality. I did note that it could
be used in a test environment to determine what parts are tied to a
specific operation as it does give a report at the end of the process.
He agreed and mentioned that perhaps it should be turned into strictly a
query tool.
Thanks again for your insight.
Best regards,
Dave Fullerton
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "moldboy" <dave_c_fullerton@...> wrote:
>
> Robert,
> Thank you for your insight. I will contact Epicor support as this
could
> be a very useful tool when functioning correctly.
> Kind regards,
> Dave
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown robertb_versa@ wrote:
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > We're a year live on 405a (after going live on 404 with no plans to
> upgrade until AT LEAST 408 when a critical global scheduling SCR is
> scheduled to be fixed... just nothing compelling thru latest 407 to
make
> it worthy of investing the month of testing to find all the new bugs,
> changed behavior that may not be desireable & to verify all
> customizations still work ).
> >
> > When piloting (305-403C), we found the Mass Operation Replace
function
> so woefully (and dangerously) inadequate we disabled it. At least on
403
> it DID bring over new resource groups or resources specified in the
new
> Std OP. (Somewhat frightening that on 407 it fails to even do this.)
> However, it would wipe out (set up & cycle times in the methods it
> replaced OPs in - setting cycle times to zero even though the costing
> system & the global scheduler do not handle zero time OPs at all
well).
> It also would wipe out any method specific Operation memos.
> >
> > My suggestion is that you at least contact Epicor support (and
perhaps
> they WILL find some missed step as they review the procesx with you).
At
> the very least that may lead to an SCR and eventual fix.
> >
> > Until then, I suggest you do not use it. As you pointed out, a
couple
> hundred methods to edit is not an awful chore (particularly when
facing
> a go live deadline).
> >
> > Rob
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: moldboy dave_c_fullerton@
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 10:49:33 PM
> > Subject: [Vantage] Mass Operation Replace
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > We are almost at Go Live with 1 1/2 weeks to go. We've just done one
> of
> > our last conversions and found a bum operation due to a an input
> error.
> > I had accidentally tied a resource instead of a resource group to an
> op.
> > This caused a sequencing error that would not allow costs to roll.
The
> > only way I thought of to fix this was to create a replacement
> operation
> > tied to the original resource group then do a mass operation
replace.
> > This seemed to work fine except that when we tried to roll the
costs,
> we
> > didn't receive any from the operation. We found that the resource
> group
> > that the operation was tied to didn't make the trip over (blank) so
> > again, no costs. I tried a new op but to the same result. The
location
> > box is checked on the resource group to allow labor reporting. I
feel
> > that I must be missing something because why would we have a Mass
> > Operation Replace if you still have to check out each individual
part
> to
> > tie the resource group to (?). It's only 200+ parts we need to fix
so
> > it's not a huge deal however I'm puzzled. Ideas? We're at 8.03.407.
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Dave Fullerton
> > Die Cast Engineering Supervisor
> > Le Sueur Incorporated
> > Le Sueur, MN
> > dave_c_fullerton@ lesueurinc. com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>