Performance Ramblings

[system]

We decided to kill it after 7 hours it never completed processing. Agreed,
30min is brutal, and was for our largest stockroom, 5min was the usual for a
summary report (again, brutal compared to 45 seconds).



Randy Stulce





_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Mike Lowe
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 3:56 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



Wow...7 hours...brutal. For that matter, 30 minutes seems brutal.

Guess I'll have to tell my users to stop complaining about the 45
seconds it takes now!

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf
Of rstulce
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 2:53 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

I don't think it's the same issue. The report isn't printing it just
goes
into the "processing" mode and stays there, we let one report run for 7
hours when it should take maybe 30 min. It's been working up to this
patch
and we're working with support on it now.

Randy Stulce

_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of
Mike Lowe
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:14 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

When you say the stock status is broke, can you elaborate? We're
getting ready to take a significant inventory write down because of the
inventory / stock status discrepancy and have been assured that it is
corrected on 6.1.540. I need to make sure that what you're seeing isn't
a continuation of a 6.1 problem that wasn't really corrected.

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf
Of rstulce
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:55 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

We updated a 8.00.811 last week. Other than an issue with the Stock
Status
report (it's broke) the performance has been the same as 810. So wait
until the report, or 811x patch, then you may be able to move up without
loosing performance. We are also a small manufacturer and I hate to jump
on
the performance band wagon but we have seen the same issues as everyone
else. I too spend allot of my time calming our users frustrations at
Vantage.

There is a bottleneck in Vantage performance somewhere, but I haven't
heard
Epicor acknowledge that there is nor that they are working on a
solution.

Thanks,

Randy Stulce

_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of
John Walter
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:37 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

I am still running 6.1 but I understand one of the objectives of 8.03
was an
increase in performance over 8.0. Has this not been met?

John Walter | National IS Manager | Hufcor Pty Ltd
7 Trade Park Drive, Tullamarine Vic 3043
Phone +61 3 9330 3733 | Fax +61 3 9338 9015
Email john.w@hufcor. <mailto:john.w%40hufcor.com.au> com.au
www.hufcor.com.au

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf Of
Scott Litzau
Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2007 1:57 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

I am on 8.00.810c and every time this group talks about performance it
seems
to get worse as the Patch Levels go up. I was going to go to 8.00.811 in
a
couple of weeks and I am looking at 8.03.xxx but my users complain of
the
slowness now. If I upgrade to get he new features they will scream about
the
performance.

We are a small manufacturer that had 5 separate systems running what we
consolidated into Vantage, a blessing from an IT standpoint and the
visibility and historical perspective. I went through a lengthy
evaluation
time and then a group of key people choose Vantage over 4 other systems
for
the feature set and customization possibilities. In my environment I
continue to have to make my users see why we went with a new system.
They
are frustrated with the lack of performance, as am I.

I know that Epicor people monitor this group and all I have to say is
that
Epicor should be committed to rectifying performance issue we all have
seen
and experienced. Until they do that then having new features in an
upgraded
version is just not worth it. AND make us aware that you are aware of
the
situation and inform us what you are doing to improve it. Communicate,
communicate, communicate. It is so simple and would let us know you hear
our
concerns.

In the last few days, after reading all the posts regarding performance,
it
has become apparent that I need to take all my desktops to 2GB RAM, they
are
at 1GB now, maybe I should just max them to 4GB for XP (32 bit). I
thought
1GB at the time should be plenty, but it has become obvious that is not
so.
So besides the cost for Vantage I need to incur additional costs just to
make sure the user experience is tolerable. As a small manufacturer we
are
always watching costs, our margin for bad decisions is not as great as
larger manufacturers.

That's my rant.

Scott Litzau
IT Manager
Olympus Flag & Banner

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf Of
Joe Rojas
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:14 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

We are on 8.03.304C and each line added increases subsequent load times.

Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@tnco- <mailto:jrojas%40tnco-inc.com> inc.com

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com

<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com

<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [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]

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/
<http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
<http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
<http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/
<http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
<http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
<http://groups. <http://groups.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
<http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links> >
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

__________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagel
<http://www.messagel <http://www.messagelabs.com/email> abs.com/email
<http://www.messagel <http://www.messagelabs.com/email> abs.com/email> >
abs.com/email
__________________________________________________________

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

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

__________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagel
<http://www.messagelabs.com/email> abs.com/email
__________________________________________________________

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





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

[system]

I was at a Epicor class not long ago and a fellow classmate told me
that in the June 2006 Vista FYI publication there was an article
describing how to remove translations that you do not use in order to
improve performance.

Does anyone know of this and if so do you have a copy of this article
to share or the steps to take. We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
hardware upgrades.

[system]

Scott writes:

>... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
> hardware upgrades.

This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where the time is
spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above 5% cpu usage,
my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory), running GB
ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully slow. Are there
any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these transactions?
Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.

I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-marshalling data
to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve on that.
Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a lot of room
for improvement.

Just wondering...

Mark W.

[system]

Mark,

I agree with you on the marshalling for the ProDataSets
and the .net datasets.

I have noticed that some parameters within appserver config files have
detrimental effects such that you get strange delays when nothing seems
to be occurring.



Increasing the bi cluster size helps with the disk IO as does more
APW's, promon is the best tool for getting these correct for your
environment.

Always look at testing with your data and the ones that come with the
product to rule out any data issues.



It would be nice to develop some applications / scripts to benchmark
vantage configurations.



Then we can easily all compare results and configurations.



Applications would create sales orders delete, jobs run MRP etc and time
various processes.....



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: 21 March 2007 14:23
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Performance Profiling (was translations)



Scott writes:

>... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
> hardware upgrades.

This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where the time
is
spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above 5% cpu
usage,
my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory), running GB
ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully slow. Are
there
any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
transactions?
Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.

I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-marshalling
data
to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve on
that.
Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a lot of
room
for improvement.

Just wondering...

Mark W.



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

[system]

If you understand log analysis there are lots of development and
performance aids at the OpenEdge Hive, http://www.oehive.org

Nothing that will automate but lots of analysis tools.





Gerard M Wadman

Sr. Network Systems Engineer



Scandius BioMedical Inc.

11A Beaver Brook Road

Littleton, MA 01460



978/486-4088 x 124

978/486-4108 (fax)



http://www.scandius.com/





This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you
have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately
and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not
use, disclose or distribute this e-mail without the author's prior
permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of
transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own
virus checks on any attachment to this message. We do not accept
liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses







________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:23 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Performance Profiling (was translations)



Scott writes:

>... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
> hardware upgrades.

This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where the time
is
spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above 5% cpu
usage,
my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory), running GB
ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully slow. Are
there
any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
transactions?
Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.

I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-marshalling
data
to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve on
that.
Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a lot of
room
for improvement.

Just wondering...

Mark W.





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

[system]

Thanks Gerard,

I have looked at the various ProTop and some 4Gl
benchmark tools I might put together some kind of benchmarking
application which simulates the UI and load ....



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Gerard Wadman
Sent: 21 March 2007 15:41
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Performance Profiling (was translations)



If you understand log analysis there are lots of development and
performance aids at the OpenEdge Hive, http://www.oehive.org

Nothing that will automate but lots of analysis tools.

Gerard M Wadman

Sr. Network Systems Engineer

Scandius BioMedical Inc.

11A Beaver Brook Road

Littleton, MA 01460

978/486-4088 x 124

978/486-4108 (fax)

http://www.scandius.com/

This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you
have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately
and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not
use, disclose or distribute this e-mail without the author's prior
permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of
transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own
virus checks on any attachment to this message. We do not accept
liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:23 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Performance Profiling (was translations)

Scott writes:

>... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
> hardware upgrades.

This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where the time
is
spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above 5% cpu
usage,
my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory), running GB
ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully slow. Are
there
any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
transactions?
Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.

I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-marshalling
data
to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve on
that.
Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a lot of
room
for improvement.

Just wondering...

Mark W.

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



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

[system]

A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended heavily
on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike as
well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.

I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased and
finished in 4 seconds...

My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
environment.

Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
see what kind of difference is evident

>
>
> Scott writes:
> >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
> > hardware upgrades.
>
> This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where the

time

> is
> spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above 5%

cpu

> usage,
> my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory), running

GB

> ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully

slow. Are

> there
> any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> transactions?
> Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
>
> I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-

marshalling

> data
> to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve on
> that.
> Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a lot

of

> room
> for improvement.
>
> Just wondering...
>
> Mark W.
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[system]

Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit connections to
have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!





From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended heavily
on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike as
well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.

I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased and
finished in 4 seconds...

My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
environment.

Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
see what kind of difference is evident

>
>
> Scott writes:
> >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
> > hardware upgrades.
>
> This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where the

time

> is
> spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above 5%

cpu

> usage,
> my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory), running

GB

> ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully

slow. Are

> there
> any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> transactions?
> Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
>
> I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-

marshalling

> data
> to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve on
> that.
> Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a lot

of

> room
> for improvement.
>
> Just wondering...
>
> Mark W.
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

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

[system]

I find the SysInternals tools (now at Microsoft) very helpful, especially:

Process Monitor:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/processmonitor.mspx

Process Explorer:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/processexplorer.mspx

TcpView:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Networking/TcpView.mspx

And just recently released, a new version of the network analyzer NetMon:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/default.mspx (currently linked
to homepage)

Although I haven't tried the process (PSTools), this may be useful because it
can monitor/manage processes locally or remotely:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/ProcessesAndThreads/PsTools.mspx
specifically pslist:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/pslist.mspx

There are some hooks for .Net profiling:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/hood/

Mark w.

[system]

Scott,

I'm not sure what was in the 2006 FYI article since the link from Epicweb
doesn't appear to be working (Why couldn't Epicor just stick with PDF files
for the newsletter so we could archive the newsletters ourselves).

Anyway, if memory serves me correctly...
1. Go to System Management > Company Maintenance > User
2. On the "Security" Tab, make sure "Allow Translation" is not checked.

Here's what help says about it.

Allow Translation
When selected, this check box gives translation privileges to the user. This
lets the user select different language sets for the text within the
interface. Note that selecting this check box will slow down the
application's performance. This option causes the translation functionality
to be loaded with each form. If this user will not work with translations,
do not select this check box.


Hope that helps,
Dan Snyder
IT Manager
Mercury Electronics
717-428-0222 ext.224




_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Scott Litzau
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 9:54 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Translations



I was at a Epicor class not long ago and a fellow classmate told me
that in the June 2006 Vista FYI publication there was an article
describing how to remove translations that you do not use in order to
improve performance.

Does anyone know of this and if so do you have a copy of this article
to share or the steps to take. We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
hardware upgrades.






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

[system]

Dan,

Thanks, I do have Translations off. I thought maybe there was something
about removing them that helps performance. I will keep looking to see if
that is true.

Anyway, I looked at the FYI Newsletters online yesterday and discovered the
dead links. I put a ticket into Epicor. That was the first they heard about
the dead links. I got a call this morning and they are working on remedying
the issue. Apparently there was other dead links that they found.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Dan Snyder
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:33 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Translations


Scott,

I'm not sure what was in the 2006 FYI article since the link from Epicweb
doesn't appear to be working (Why couldn't Epicor just stick with PDF files
for the newsletter so we could archive the newsletters ourselves).

Anyway, if memory serves me correctly...
1. Go to System Management > Company Maintenance > User
2. On the "Security" Tab, make sure "Allow Translation" is not checked.

Here's what help says about it.

Allow Translation
When selected, this check box gives translation privileges to the user. This
lets the user select different language sets for the text within the
interface. Note that selecting this check box will slow down the
application's performance. This option causes the translation functionality
to be loaded with each form. If this user will not work with translations,
do not select this check box.


Hope that helps,
Dan Snyder
IT Manager
Mercury Electronics
717-428-0222 ext.224




_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Scott Litzau
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 9:54 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Translations



I was at a Epicor class not long ago and a fellow classmate told me
that in the June 2006 Vista FYI publication there was an article
describing how to remove translations that you do not use in order to
improve performance.

Does anyone know of this and if so do you have a copy of this article
to share or the steps to take. We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond just
hardware upgrades.






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



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

[system]

Mark,

I use PSTOOLS all the time. Remotely I am able to start and stop services if
needed, reboot workstations or Servers, List the Service running. I think it
is a great tool. Comes in handy when I can't for some reason get a
connection through VNC.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Mark Wonsil
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 10:18 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Performance Profiling (was translations)


I find the SysInternals tools (now at Microsoft) very helpful, especially:

Process Monitor:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/processmonitor.mspx

Process Explorer:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/processexplorer.mspx

TcpView:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Networking/TcpView.mspx

And just recently released, a new version of the network analyzer NetMon:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/default.mspx (currently linked
to homepage)

Although I haven't tried the process (PSTools), this may be useful because
it
can monitor/manage processes locally or remotely:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/ProcessesAndThreads/PsTools.ms
px
specifically pslist:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/pslist.mspx

There are some hooks for .Net profiling:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/hood/

Mark w.




Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

[system]

Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On

Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[system]

We get the same thing with Quotes as well. It's like it saves every line item when you save. They wanted me to send our DB to them.

----- Original Message ----
From: bw2868bond <bwalker@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07:25 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings


Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "Stephen Edginton" <stephene@.. .>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On

Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance' . Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/

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

[system]

Happened to us too.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Bill Baraski
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:58 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



We get the same thing with Quotes as well. It's like it saves every line
item when you save. They wanted me to send our DB to them.

----- Original Message ----
From: bw2868bond <bwalker@...
<mailto:bwalker%40adcocircuits.com> >
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07:25 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "Stephen Edginton" <stephene@.. .>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On

Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance' . Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

__________________________________________________________
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/

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





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

[system]

We are on 8.03.304C and each line added increases subsequent load times.



Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@...



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [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]

[system]

I am on 8.00.810c and every time this group talks about performance it seems
to get worse as the Patch Levels go up. I was going to go to 8.00.811 in a
couple of weeks and I am looking at 8.03.xxx but my users complain of the
slowness now. If I upgrade to get he new features they will scream about the
performance.

We are a small manufacturer that had 5 separate systems running what we
consolidated into Vantage, a blessing from an IT standpoint and the
visibility and historical perspective. I went through a lengthy evaluation
time and then a group of key people choose Vantage over 4 other systems for
the feature set and customization possibilities. In my environment I
continue to have to make my users see why we went with a new system. They
are frustrated with the lack of performance, as am I.

I know that Epicor people monitor this group and all I have to say is that
Epicor should be committed to rectifying performance issue we all have seen
and experienced. Until they do that then having new features in an upgraded
version is just not worth it. AND make us aware that you are aware of the
situation and inform us what you are doing to improve it. Communicate,
communicate, communicate. It is so simple and would let us know you hear our
concerns.

In the last few days, after reading all the posts regarding performance, it
has become apparent that I need to take all my desktops to 2GB RAM, they are
at 1GB now, maybe I should just max them to 4GB for XP (32 bit). I thought
1GB at the time should be plenty, but it has become obvious that is not so.
So besides the cost for Vantage I need to incur additional costs just to
make sure the user experience is tolerable. As a small manufacturer we are
always watching costs, our margin for bad decisions is not as great as
larger manufacturers.

That's my rant.

Scott Litzau
IT Manager
Olympus Flag & Banner

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Joe Rojas
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:14 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings


We are on 8.03.304C and each line added increases subsequent load times.



Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@...



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [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]



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

[system]

Do you autoload groups?



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Scott Litzau
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:57 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



I am on 8.00.810c and every time this group talks about performance it
seems
to get worse as the Patch Levels go up. I was going to go to 8.00.811 in
a
couple of weeks and I am looking at 8.03.xxx but my users complain of
the
slowness now. If I upgrade to get he new features they will scream about
the
performance.

We are a small manufacturer that had 5 separate systems running what we
consolidated into Vantage, a blessing from an IT standpoint and the
visibility and historical perspective. I went through a lengthy
evaluation
time and then a group of key people choose Vantage over 4 other systems
for
the feature set and customization possibilities. In my environment I
continue to have to make my users see why we went with a new system.
They
are frustrated with the lack of performance, as am I.

I know that Epicor people monitor this group and all I have to say is
that
Epicor should be committed to rectifying performance issue we all have
seen
and experienced. Until they do that then having new features in an
upgraded
version is just not worth it. AND make us aware that you are aware of
the
situation and inform us what you are doing to improve it. Communicate,
communicate, communicate. It is so simple and would let us know you hear
our
concerns.

In the last few days, after reading all the posts regarding performance,
it
has become apparent that I need to take all my desktops to 2GB RAM, they
are
at 1GB now, maybe I should just max them to 4GB for XP (32 bit). I
thought
1GB at the time should be plenty, but it has become obvious that is not
so.
So besides the cost for Vantage I need to incur additional costs just to
make sure the user experience is tolerable. As a small manufacturer we
are
always watching costs, our margin for bad decisions is not as great as
larger manufacturers.

That's my rant.

Scott Litzau
IT Manager
Olympus Flag & Banner

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of
Joe Rojas
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:14 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

We are on 8.03.304C and each line added increases subsequent load times.

Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@... <mailto:jrojas%40tnco-inc.com>

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [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]

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links





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

[system]

I am still running 6.1 but I understand one of the objectives of 8.03 was an
increase in performance over 8.0. Has this not been met?

John Walter | National IS Manager | Hufcor Pty Ltd
7 Trade Park Drive, Tullamarine Vic 3043
Phone +61 3 9330 3733 | Fax +61 3 9338 9015
Email john.w@...
www.hufcor.com.au

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Scott Litzau
Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2007 1:57 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

I am on 8.00.810c and every time this group talks about performance it seems
to get worse as the Patch Levels go up. I was going to go to 8.00.811 in a
couple of weeks and I am looking at 8.03.xxx but my users complain of the
slowness now. If I upgrade to get he new features they will scream about the
performance.

We are a small manufacturer that had 5 separate systems running what we
consolidated into Vantage, a blessing from an IT standpoint and the
visibility and historical perspective. I went through a lengthy evaluation
time and then a group of key people choose Vantage over 4 other systems for
the feature set and customization possibilities. In my environment I
continue to have to make my users see why we went with a new system. They
are frustrated with the lack of performance, as am I.

I know that Epicor people monitor this group and all I have to say is that
Epicor should be committed to rectifying performance issue we all have seen
and experienced. Until they do that then having new features in an upgraded
version is just not worth it. AND make us aware that you are aware of the
situation and inform us what you are doing to improve it. Communicate,
communicate, communicate. It is so simple and would let us know you hear our
concerns.

In the last few days, after reading all the posts regarding performance, it
has become apparent that I need to take all my desktops to 2GB RAM, they are
at 1GB now, maybe I should just max them to 4GB for XP (32 bit). I thought
1GB at the time should be plenty, but it has become obvious that is not so.
So besides the cost for Vantage I need to incur additional costs just to
make sure the user experience is tolerable. As a small manufacturer we are
always watching costs, our margin for bad decisions is not as great as
larger manufacturers.

That's my rant.

Scott Litzau
IT Manager
Olympus Flag & Banner

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Joe Rojas
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:14 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings


We are on 8.03.304C and each line added increases subsequent load times.



Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@...



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [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]



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links







Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

[system]

We updated a 8.00.811 last week. Other than an issue with the Stock Status
report (it's broke) the performance has been the same as 810. So wait
until the report, or 811x patch, then you may be able to move up without
loosing performance. We are also a small manufacturer and I hate to jump on
the performance band wagon but we have seen the same issues as everyone
else. I too spend allot of my time calming our users frustrations at
Vantage.



There is a bottleneck in Vantage performance somewhere, but I haven't heard
Epicor acknowledge that there is nor that they are working on a solution.





Thanks,

Randy Stulce





_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
John Walter
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:37 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings



I am still running 6.1 but I understand one of the objectives of 8.03 was an
increase in performance over 8.0. Has this not been met?

John Walter | National IS Manager | Hufcor Pty Ltd
7 Trade Park Drive, Tullamarine Vic 3043
Phone +61 3 9330 3733 | Fax +61 3 9338 9015
Email john.w@hufcor. <mailto:john.w%40hufcor.com.au> com.au
www.hufcor.com.au

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf Of
Scott Litzau
Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2007 1:57 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

I am on 8.00.810c and every time this group talks about performance it seems
to get worse as the Patch Levels go up. I was going to go to 8.00.811 in a
couple of weeks and I am looking at 8.03.xxx but my users complain of the
slowness now. If I upgrade to get he new features they will scream about the
performance.

We are a small manufacturer that had 5 separate systems running what we
consolidated into Vantage, a blessing from an IT standpoint and the
visibility and historical perspective. I went through a lengthy evaluation
time and then a group of key people choose Vantage over 4 other systems for
the feature set and customization possibilities. In my environment I
continue to have to make my users see why we went with a new system. They
are frustrated with the lack of performance, as am I.

I know that Epicor people monitor this group and all I have to say is that
Epicor should be committed to rectifying performance issue we all have seen
and experienced. Until they do that then having new features in an upgraded
version is just not worth it. AND make us aware that you are aware of the
situation and inform us what you are doing to improve it. Communicate,
communicate, communicate. It is so simple and would let us know you hear our
concerns.

In the last few days, after reading all the posts regarding performance, it
has become apparent that I need to take all my desktops to 2GB RAM, they are
at 1GB now, maybe I should just max them to 4GB for XP (32 bit). I thought
1GB at the time should be plenty, but it has become obvious that is not so.
So besides the cost for Vantage I need to incur additional costs just to
make sure the user experience is tolerable. As a small manufacturer we are
always watching costs, our margin for bad decisions is not as great as
larger manufacturers.

That's my rant.

Scott Litzau
IT Manager
Olympus Flag & Banner

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf Of
Joe Rojas
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:14 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

We are on 8.03.304C and each line added increases subsequent load times.

Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@tnco- <mailto:jrojas%40tnco-inc.com> inc.com

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com] On
Behalf
Of bw2868bond
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings

Well, the 'wheel' wants to keep my PC. No noticable difference
connecting pc between 100T and 1000T. The 3.0 GHz processor and 2 Gb
ram helped.

New problem noticed after moving from 809f to 811...
In POEntry, time to add line item to 65 line PO has increased
dramatically from 809f to 811. Support dwells on our customization of
the form but the slowdown is evident on the base module. Anyone else
notice performance slowdown with PO Entry on Many lined POs??

--- In vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Stephen Edginton" <stephene@...>
wrote:

>
> Keep us posted Bernie I have not found teaming on gigabit

connections to

> have any impact on speed for the clients might do some testing!
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com

<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf

> Of bw2868bond
> Sent: 21 March 2007 16:10
> To: vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com

<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>

> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Performance Ramblings
>
>
>
> A few weeks back, I was looking into 'performance'. Being 'old
> school' I figured performance of the Vantage product depended

heavily

> on server horsepower. I watched CPU and network utilization of my
> workstation while locking a workorder. My P4 3 Ghz machine went to
> nearly 100% processor usage and network traffic had a large spike

as

> well. It took roughly 8 seconds to lock the job.
>
> I looked at the server with it's two nic ports and single cable....
> I connected a second cable from nic to hub and enabled 'teaming'
> effectivly doubling my nic speed. I performed the same lock process
> on my workstation and this time the network utilization increased

and

> finished in 4 seconds...
>
> My presumtion is I have a highly capable server loafing around
> waiting for the network and the clients to do all the work. My test
> network is only 100 baseT but even on the production network,
> improvement has been seen by nic teaming in a gigabit switched
> environment.
>
> Tomorrow I will be letting a 'squeaky wheel' use my workstation to
> see what kind of difference is evident
>
> >
> >
> > Scott writes:
> > >... We are on Vantage 8.00.810c and I am
> > > always looking for ways to improve client performance beyond

just

> > > hardware upgrades.
> >
> > This multi-tiered architecture makes it difficult to see where

the

> time
> > is
> > spent while waiting for transactions. My server is RARELY above

5%

> cpu
> > usage,
> > my hit rates are in the 90% range (who database in memory),

running

> GB
> > ethernet, but some things (like saving work orders) is awfully
> slow. Are
> > there
> > any tools that help determine where the time is spent on these
> > transactions?
> > Time on the client? Time in transit? Time on the server? Etc.
> >
> > I suspect that a lot of time is wasted marshalling and un-
> marshalling
> > data
> > to/from XML in the ADO.Net stack but I'm not sure how to improve

on

> > that.
> > Throwing hardware works for a while but it seems that there's a

lot

> of
> > room
> > for improvement.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [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]

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links>
yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links





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