V9 - Crystal vs SRSS

Yes, the data source for your SSRS reports just needs to point to your
replicated SQL database.


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "nustepvantage" <dpfiester@...> wrote:
>
> If you are running Progress and replicating to SQL in Epicor 9.05 can
SSRS reports with data from the replicated SQL database be attached to
the Epicor 9.05 menu and run from there? Or do you need to be running on
SQL instead of Progress?
>
> Thanks,
> David
Has anyone benchmarked the performance of forms and reports in Epicor V9 using both Crystal and SRSS, in particular V 9.05? If you are using SRSS are there any special configurations that improved performance?
What was the learning curve like going to SRSS. Given SAP's ownership of Crystal I think it is wise to start looking at SRSS before it becomes a necessity :).

Thanks,

Keith Mailloux
Ferguson Perforating
(401)941-8876



---------------------------------
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this
e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this
information by a person other than the intended recipient is
unauthorized and may be illegal.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We have tried doing the same form in crystal and ssrs. No noticeable
difference. I havent actually timed it with a stopwatch but from our simple
tests, it was no difference.






On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 21:13:00 +0000
Keith Mailloux <keith.mailloux@...> wrote:
Has anyone benchmarked the performance of forms and
reports in Epicor V9 using both Crystal and SRSS, in
particular V 9.05? If you are using SRSS are there any
special configurations that improved performance?
What was the learning curve like going to SRSS. Given
SAP's ownership of Crystal I think it is wise to start
looking at SRSS before it becomes a necessity :).

Thanks,

Keith Mailloux
Ferguson Perforating
(401)941-8876



---------------------------------
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential
and
privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient,
please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail,
delete this
e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use
of this
information by a person other than the intended recipient
is
unauthorized and may be illegal.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
For the most part they'll be very comparable for performance bench-marking.Â
Developing in SSRS is at best similar to CR; but in my opinion isn't as intuitive and easy to design the layout.Â
SSRS is robust in that its mainly driven by SQL code whereas CR is more GUI in appearance for table joins, etc....
An SSRS developer can pick up CR pretty quickly, but a CR developer will have a higher learning curve picking up SSRS.Â
CR has been around a lot longer then SSRS.Â
A typical power user w/ Epicor DB schema knowledge can develop much faster w/ CR then they can w/ SSRS. Usually SSRS will be an IT tool.Â
Just my 2 cents.Â
Â
---------------
Practical Technology Solutions
IT consulting specializing in Epicor, Macola, and Jobscope ERP systems. Website Engineering and HP3000.Â

Website:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â www.practicaltek.comÂ
Follow us on:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â www.twitter.com/practicaltekÂ
Facebook: Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â http://www.facebook.com/pages/Practical-Technology-Solutions/153428191424176%c2%a0
World Headquarters: 1485 County Road 1575, Ashland, Ohio, 44805
Office:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 419-557-2225 Â Cell: 419-651-6704 Â Fax: 732-601-6704
Email:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â sales@... Â Â
                 owner@...  Â
                 tekhelp@...  Â
                 jim_chance@...




>________________________________
> From: Nick <nick@...>
>To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 5:25 PM
>Subject: Re: [Vantage] V9 - Crystal vs SRSS
>
>

>We have tried doing the same form in crystal and ssrs. No noticeable
>difference. I havent actually timed it with a stopwatch but from our simple
>tests, it was no difference.
>
>On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 21:13:00 +0000
>Keith Mailloux <keith.mailloux@...> wrote:
>Has anyone benchmarked the performance of forms and
>reports in Epicor V9 using both Crystal and SRSS, in
>particular V 9.05? If you are using SRSS are there any
>special configurations that improved performance?
>What was the learning curve like going to SRSS. Given
>SAP's ownership of Crystal I think it is wise to start
>looking at SRSS before it becomes a necessity :).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Keith Mailloux
>Ferguson Perforating
>(401)941-8876
>
>---------------------------------
>This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential
>and
>privileged information. If you are not the intended
>recipient,
>please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail,
>delete this
>e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use
>of this
>information by a person other than the intended recipient
>is
>unauthorized and may be illegal.
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If the report goes straight to the SQL database, that is, it's not based on an XML file dropped in the EpicorData folder, SSRS should be faster, perhaps significantly. The SSRS workload is done on the database server whereas with Crystal, depending on how the report is written, much of the workload is done on the client while data is pulled across the wire and joined locally. To see this in action, watch the client CPU and network spike when running a Crystal report.

There are other advantages to SSRS including the ability to construct cascading parameters. In general, I think the presentation of parameters is better in SSRS. Since the parameters are always in view, it's easy to change just one or two and rerun the report rather than starting over.

Unlike Crystal, SSRS is WAN friendly because the report is generated on the server and rendered in the browser.

As to the learning curve, if you are familiar with Microsoft Visual Studio and SQL, you will probably prefer SSRS from the start. If not, you will benefit by learning SSRS and you may enjoy the process. To take full advantage of SSRS, you must create SQL views on the database server so consider that learning curve and the associated benefits as well. Note, SSRS is not much like Crystal but then Crystal is it's own thing, nothing is like it.

Thanks,
Brad

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Keith Mailloux <keith.mailloux@...> wrote:
>
> Has anyone benchmarked the performance of forms and reports in Epicor V9 using both Crystal and SRSS, in particular V 9.05? If you are using SRSS are there any special configurations that improved performance?
> What was the learning curve like going to SRSS. Given SAP's ownership of Crystal I think it is wise to start looking at SRSS before it becomes a necessity :).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Keith Mailloux
> Ferguson Perforating
> (401)941-8876
Note the built in Epicor SSRS reports still take their data source from XML.
Epicor didn't re-write the whole of the reporting framework just the presentation part for SSRS.
However SSRS should be faster as this XML is not now going over the wire to the clients as Brad mentioned.

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brad
Sent: 28 December 2011 15:31
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: V9 - Crystal vs SRSS




If the report goes straight to the SQL database, that is, it's not based on an XML file dropped in the EpicorData folder, SSRS should be faster, perhaps significantly. The SSRS workload is done on the database server whereas with Crystal, depending on how the report is written, much of the workload is done on the client while data is pulled across the wire and joined locally. To see this in action, watch the client CPU and network spike when running a Crystal report.

There are other advantages to SSRS including the ability to construct cascading parameters. In general, I think the presentation of parameters is better in SSRS. Since the parameters are always in view, it's easy to change just one or two and rerun the report rather than starting over.

Unlike Crystal, SSRS is WAN friendly because the report is generated on the server and rendered in the browser.

As to the learning curve, if you are familiar with Microsoft Visual Studio and SQL, you will probably prefer SSRS from the start. If not, you will benefit by learning SSRS and you may enjoy the process. To take full advantage of SSRS, you must create SQL views on the database server so consider that learning curve and the associated benefits as well. Note, SSRS is not much like Crystal but then Crystal is it's own thing, nothing is like it.

Thanks,
Brad

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, Keith Mailloux <keith.mailloux@...<mailto:keith.mailloux@...>> wrote:
>
> Has anyone benchmarked the performance of forms and reports in Epicor V9 using both Crystal and SRSS, in particular V 9.05? If you are using SRSS are there any special configurations that improved performance?
> What was the learning curve like going to SRSS. Given SAP's ownership of Crystal I think it is wise to start looking at SRSS before it becomes a necessity :).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Keith Mailloux
> Ferguson Perforating
> (401)941-8876



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If you are running Progress and replicating to SQL in Epicor 9.05 can SSRS reports with data from the replicated SQL database be attached to the Epicor 9.05 menu and run from there? Or do you need to be running on SQL instead of Progress?

Thanks,
David

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brad" <Brad_feazell@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If the report goes straight to the SQL database, that is, it's not based on an XML file dropped in the EpicorData folder, SSRS should be faster, perhaps significantly. The SSRS workload is done on the database server whereas with Crystal, depending on how the report is written, much of the workload is done on the client while data is pulled across the wire and joined locally. To see this in action, watch the client CPU and network spike when running a Crystal report.
>
> There are other advantages to SSRS including the ability to construct cascading parameters. In general, I think the presentation of parameters is better in SSRS. Since the parameters are always in view, it's easy to change just one or two and rerun the report rather than starting over.
>
> Unlike Crystal, SSRS is WAN friendly because the report is generated on the server and rendered in the browser.
>
> As to the learning curve, if you are familiar with Microsoft Visual Studio and SQL, you will probably prefer SSRS from the start. If not, you will benefit by learning SSRS and you may enjoy the process. To take full advantage of SSRS, you must create SQL views on the database server so consider that learning curve and the associated benefits as well. Note, SSRS is not much like Crystal but then Crystal is it's own thing, nothing is like it.
>
> Thanks,
> Brad
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Keith Mailloux <keith.mailloux@> wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone benchmarked the performance of forms and reports in Epicor V9 using both Crystal and SRSS, in particular V 9.05? If you are using SRSS are there any special configurations that improved performance?
> > What was the learning curve like going to SRSS. Given SAP's ownership of Crystal I think it is wise to start looking at SRSS before it becomes a necessity :).
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Keith Mailloux
> > Ferguson Perforating
> > (401)941-8876
>