Im sure I will get a little flak for this due to my point of view. This is what I posted in the EUG on a similar topic. Just reposting for those that may not have access to the EUG.
I feel that I am the odd one out here, hehe.
We upgraded to 9.05.602 from Vantage 8.03.405 in December. The process process for upgrading had been practiced and nailed down a few months before the upgrade and we did several trial runs to insure that we had the process documented correctly for our needs.
Due to our testing we knew early on that we would need to re-create all of our customizations. Much of the work was just copy and paste with some of it requiring a little more effort to get back up. Once a customization was completed we exported it to help streamline the upgrade process.
BPM's were a little different and with the pass thru supposedly completed now I am not sure how well its going to work. To get the BPM's working you have 2 solutions. 1. recreate them in your testing and export them. Or 2. you must stop at the 9.04 level and verify them. If you stop and verify them first before continueing on to 9.05 they will not give you any probelms during the upgrade process. At least that was how it worked for us.
As for the accounting side Im going to be heartless here, for those that did their homework they knew before they upgraded that it was a massive change. Our controller went into it fully knowing and understanding that it would be up to him to understand how all of the changes affected the system before we went live. He also had documented all the steps he needed to do after I got the database up and running for the GL to setup correctly.
That all being said our upgrade was relatively painless. Now Im not saying it was perfect. I still have about 20 tickets open with SCRs and I am waiting for the 605 release to have most of them fixed. Yes it is irritating to have issues like this.
Upgrading systems has always required beefier system specs. Having gone through this kind of pain with several companies i worked with in the past its expected. Granted I will admit that the progress side of this has gotten completely out of control. Our environment is virtualized with the app server and the DB on the same server.
Now perhaps I am speaking to the wrong crowd, I understand that several of the posters environments make me look like a drop in the bucket. My observations show that anyone who goes to MSSQL or splits the app server from the DB take a total nosedive in performance regardless of the size of the database. Only those that can throw tons of money at it come out remotely ok. I am not defending Epicor on this one as I feel it is unacceptable for as little as they know about resolving this problem. It is not ok to say "throw more money at it." Progress x64 users see this major pain point when it comes to running conversions, it is absolutely atrocious.
Forgot to show my info
9.05.602
Progess x64
Server 2008 R2 as a VM
App Server and DB on same server
8 Cores
12 GB RAM
Tied to a SAN
24 users
12 MES
Other products used (not all on same server): Sonic, Replication server, EPM, Information Worker, APM, EEPM, Portal, Service Connect, Open 4, AFR
"Zac" Jason Woodward
Network Administrator
Intermountain Electronics, Inc.
O: 877-544-2291
M: 435-820-6515
F: 435-637-9601
www.ie-corp.com
Creating customer confidence through extraordinary service and experienced industry experts.
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of cubcrafters_it
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 9:30 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Upgrade from 8.03.40x to 9.05 - Share Your Experience?
We're in the middle of an 8.03.409A to 9.05.latest conversion right now.
One of the bigger (technical) hurdles in my opinion is that there's no direct route from 8.03 directly to 9.05. (Well, that's not entirely true, there's a beta for a direct upgrade that you can ask your CAM about. But it's flakey at best.)
You'll need to go from 8.03 to 9.04 which handles UOM changes and some other important magic, then load 9.05.
We're currently dead in the water on our conversion because of a GL Account issue and waiting on Epicor to provide us with a one-off fix. We haven't gotten to a point to really test any sort of performance because this accounting thing is so critical.
However, like other folks have said, a (potential) speed decrease needs be weighed against the E9 featureset, so if upgrading provides you with something that staying in 8 wouldn't give you, that needs to be considered. I'm hearing murmuring that later versions of 9.05 are getting better in terms of speed, and that Epicor is focusing on speed improvements in recent patches.
I feel that I am the odd one out here, hehe.
We upgraded to 9.05.602 from Vantage 8.03.405 in December. The process process for upgrading had been practiced and nailed down a few months before the upgrade and we did several trial runs to insure that we had the process documented correctly for our needs.
Due to our testing we knew early on that we would need to re-create all of our customizations. Much of the work was just copy and paste with some of it requiring a little more effort to get back up. Once a customization was completed we exported it to help streamline the upgrade process.
BPM's were a little different and with the pass thru supposedly completed now I am not sure how well its going to work. To get the BPM's working you have 2 solutions. 1. recreate them in your testing and export them. Or 2. you must stop at the 9.04 level and verify them. If you stop and verify them first before continueing on to 9.05 they will not give you any probelms during the upgrade process. At least that was how it worked for us.
As for the accounting side Im going to be heartless here, for those that did their homework they knew before they upgraded that it was a massive change. Our controller went into it fully knowing and understanding that it would be up to him to understand how all of the changes affected the system before we went live. He also had documented all the steps he needed to do after I got the database up and running for the GL to setup correctly.
That all being said our upgrade was relatively painless. Now Im not saying it was perfect. I still have about 20 tickets open with SCRs and I am waiting for the 605 release to have most of them fixed. Yes it is irritating to have issues like this.
Upgrading systems has always required beefier system specs. Having gone through this kind of pain with several companies i worked with in the past its expected. Granted I will admit that the progress side of this has gotten completely out of control. Our environment is virtualized with the app server and the DB on the same server.
Now perhaps I am speaking to the wrong crowd, I understand that several of the posters environments make me look like a drop in the bucket. My observations show that anyone who goes to MSSQL or splits the app server from the DB take a total nosedive in performance regardless of the size of the database. Only those that can throw tons of money at it come out remotely ok. I am not defending Epicor on this one as I feel it is unacceptable for as little as they know about resolving this problem. It is not ok to say "throw more money at it." Progress x64 users see this major pain point when it comes to running conversions, it is absolutely atrocious.
Forgot to show my info
9.05.602
Progess x64
Server 2008 R2 as a VM
App Server and DB on same server
8 Cores
12 GB RAM
Tied to a SAN
24 users
12 MES
Other products used (not all on same server): Sonic, Replication server, EPM, Information Worker, APM, EEPM, Portal, Service Connect, Open 4, AFR
"Zac" Jason Woodward
Network Administrator
Intermountain Electronics, Inc.
O: 877-544-2291
M: 435-820-6515
F: 435-637-9601
www.ie-corp.com
Creating customer confidence through extraordinary service and experienced industry experts.
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of cubcrafters_it
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 9:30 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Upgrade from 8.03.40x to 9.05 - Share Your Experience?
We're in the middle of an 8.03.409A to 9.05.latest conversion right now.
One of the bigger (technical) hurdles in my opinion is that there's no direct route from 8.03 directly to 9.05. (Well, that's not entirely true, there's a beta for a direct upgrade that you can ask your CAM about. But it's flakey at best.)
You'll need to go from 8.03 to 9.04 which handles UOM changes and some other important magic, then load 9.05.
We're currently dead in the water on our conversion because of a GL Account issue and waiting on Epicor to provide us with a one-off fix. We haven't gotten to a point to really test any sort of performance because this accounting thing is so critical.
However, like other folks have said, a (potential) speed decrease needs be weighed against the E9 featureset, so if upgrading provides you with something that staying in 8 wouldn't give you, that needs to be considered. I'm hearing murmuring that later versions of 9.05 are getting better in terms of speed, and that Epicor is focusing on speed improvements in recent patches.
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Doug Oswald" <dougo@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Yahoo! Group Members,
>
>
>
> I am looking for someone in that has upgraded from 8.03.40x to 9.05.xxx
> that would be willing to conduct a webinar or somehow share their
> experience with the rest us considering this upgrade?
>
>
>
> I cannot get upper management approval to proceed with the upgrade until
> I confirm independently of Epicor that 9.05 will have the same or better
> performance. If it is slower in any way, it could be my last upgrade
> here at Fleetwood.
>
>
>
> For selfish reasons, I am looking specifically for someone that went
> from 8.03.40x to 9.05.xxx. I want to know the details of the process
> and the hardware used. How long did it take? How large is your
> database? Did you have any custom programming? What are the reasons
> you upgraded? Did the reasons you upgraded for really work as expected?
> Is your whole network 1 GB? Etc.?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> Doug Oswald
> Manager of Information Systems and Facilities
>
> FLEETWOOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]