Upgrade 9.04 to 9.05, 9.04.508?!?

Interesting, they are only upgrading from 9.04 not 8.03, so nto sure if that would technically apply.

 

My real concern and question would be what about the people who upgraded to 9.05.60x and then to 9.05.70x later, what was fixed or changed that would now be making their DBs different than everyone else?

 

This was part of the email that was received, the problem is there is nothing on epicweb that says anything about this, including the giant upgrade and installation PDFs they are providing.

 

“For the supported upgrade track, the DUU Data Upgrade Utility needs to be used for conversions from 904.507 going to Epicor905.702x.” 

The DUU contains a 904.508 version of the 904 that has additional data conversions that are required for the upgrade to 905.702x.  This 904.508 version was not a Service pack release like a regular update release, the version was only released in the DUU utility.”

 â€œPlease find out if your IT consultant used the DUU method to upgrade your database,  if not, they need to re-upgrade your DB using the DUU, then give that DB for you to use.  The same method of upgrade thru the DUU will need to be used for your final pass that you will then go live on in 905702a whenever that time comes.”

 

 

 

 

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 6:12 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Upgrade 9.04 to 9.05, 9.04.508?!?

 



>>service pack 508
I haven't heard that one before, but they should know better than anyone.

If you have access to Epicweb you can check out Answerbook 15838MPS.
The last note on the answerbook make me want to use DUU from now on.
"Any database upgraded from 8.03.40x to 9.05.702 after the Epicor 9.05.70x product was released (May 2012) without using the DUU is unsupported".


I've used both DUU and manually.
In my cases, it was actually less time doing it manually but...



Upgrade 9.04 to 9.05, 9.04.508?!?

I am just wondering if anyone else has heard of this. I have a customer who is on 9.04 and being told that they should have used the DUU to upgrade to 9.05.702 because the DUU hasservice pack 508 which was never released but is part of the DUU.

I have some doubts about this being correct, mostly because there is no mention of any of this in the documentation that’s on EpicWeb.

Has anyone else had to do this? If you use the DUU for other purposes like upgrading from something pre-9.04 then that’s not the situation I am asking about.

I don’t want to spend time where I now would need to remove the 64-bit version of 9.05 in order to re-install the 32-bit version with the DUU, or get a whole new server setup just for this, and the fact their database is almost 200GB in SQL, it’s a pretty long process overall to be moving that DB around.

Thanks.

>>service pack 508
I haven't heard that one before, but they should know better than anyone.

If you have access to Epicweb you can check out Answerbook 15838MPS.
The last note on the answerbook make me want to use DUU from now on.
"Any database upgraded from 8.03.40x to 9.05.702 after the Epicor 9.05.70x product was released (May 2012) without using the DUU is unsupported".


I've used both DUU and manually.
In my cases, it was actually less time doing it manually but...

Now that you mention it – Using the DUU to migrate to E10, when you fire off the 9.05 Schema Change, it lists the starting version as 9.04.508

 

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 6:12 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Upgrade 9.04 to 9.05, 9.04.508?!?

 



>>service pack 508
I haven't heard that one before, but they should know better than anyone.

If you have access to Epicweb you can check out Answerbook 15838MPS.
The last note on the answerbook make me want to use DUU from now on.
"Any database upgraded from 8.03.40x to 9.05.702 after the Epicor 9.05.70x product was released (May 2012) without using the DUU is unsupported".


I've used both DUU and manually.
In my cases, it was actually less time doing it manually but...