Additional Database Server

Check the login PY900's default database you have set in SQL Server Management Studio, and make sure that that login has access to the default database you have set. For example, in our JDE_CRP, login CRPDTA has a default of master, and has public access(user mapping) to master.

That may be your issue.

Good luck,

Vernon
 
Thanks a lot everyone.
Finally I found the issue.

It was the PY900's password in the Deployment's JDE.ini.
Previous CNC guy had made all the changes and I took for granted that the password for PY900 was PY900 in JDE but it wasn't.

Nevertheless, everything is now sorted out.

The only problem I had was "speed issue"
The login to JPY900 was successful but it was really slow.

The DBSERVER2 and the other JDE Servers (DBSERVER1,DEP SERVER, ENT SERVVER, WEB SERVER) are 20 kms apart but are connected by a 2 GB link.

Do you think the distance between them is causing the speed issue ?

-Max
 
[ QUOTE ]

Do you think the distance between them is causing the speed issue ?

-Max

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

The issue is going to be latency. Try pinging the server and seeing if it comes up with a time in milliseconds. Even though the bandwidth is 2Gb, the latency is based on the speed of light - which will be noticeable at 20km. Remember, the application waits between each SQL statement - so if there is 1ms of latency, 1000 statements (the average number of statements in a sales order entry) will have 1 second of wait time. 10ms of latency will result in 10 seconds of wait time, and 100ms of latency is almost two minutes where nothing is occurring. I have a number of whitepapers that talk about how latency affects performance. Its not a good idea to separate your database servers by distance, unless you also plan to move your related web servers/app servers also. You can get over the issue of latency by using some sort of replication technology between the databases of your system tables. There are some other "tricks" that are possible to achieve better time, including caching...
 
Jon,

Have you figured out how to diminish that 'speed of light' issue, yet? My friend Einstein (a shaggier, white-furred fiend) and I, have been collectively experimenting with different algorithms... without much luck.

It does appear, if you have a 27K fiber, and you bend it in half - that, wormhole affect is factually null and void. Now, if you bend it too far - and hear a 'snap', the wormhole affect is 'Completely Borked' - and you get absolutely now transmission. We did find, interesting enough, that if you cut that 27K fiber down to a few feet - life happens quicker!

We have come to the conclusion, that: a physically shorter distance creates a better performing speed of light.

(db) - with the barking assistance of a shock-collared Einstein!
 
Have you figured out how to diminish that 'speed of light' issue, yet? My friend Einstein (a shaggier, white-furred fiend) and I, have been collectively experimenting with different algorithms... without much luck.



[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't mention about the JDElist corollary to the speed of light. That is the time recorded between an idiotic post of a supposed JDE consultant asking an inane newbie post, and the first flame. I think we are now working on a new technology to preflame the pretenders, but the breakthrough is stuck in the Oracle QA department's black vortex of death......
 
[ QUOTE ]
Jon,

Have you figured out how to diminish that 'speed of light' issue, yet? My friend Einstein (a shaggier, white-furred fiend) and I, have been collectively experimenting with different algorithms... without much luck.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the speed of light has already been broken using quantum tunneling :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3303699/We-have-broken-speed-of-light.html

This will lead to quantum computing - which will in turn lead to processors being able to run at speeds almost infinitely faster than today's computers.

However, to expand on my original statements - to give a more in-depth description of what is occurring - and directly relate it to JDE....

Let's take a single sales order transaction of one line. Now this transaction in JDE usually takes about 1000 SQL statements to complete. Each SQL statement has to occur synchronously - ie, before the next statement occurs, the statement must usually finish. Most of these statements are READs as opposed to a handful of WRITEs

The speed of light travels at a constant 299,792,458 m / s. Over 20km, the time would therefore take Approximately 0.067ms to transverse the distance. Not very long.

However, 1000 SQL statements, providing each statement was contained in 2 packets (source -> destination and return packets) would therefore take 133ms to complete. That is assuming that every point along the path takes no time to transverse, ie, in a perfect, imaginary world.

The reality is that along each point in the 20km, there are a number of repeaters and other mechanisms that "translate" the data so that it can identify the destination. The longer the route, the more pieces used to route the traffic. Each point along the route adds an exponential amount of time for the processing. Since fiber can only realistically stretch 2km using traditional methods, it is realistic to imagine that there are at least 12 points along the route where traffic is slowed substantially.

A network specialist captures this data in millisecond timeframes, and can use tools to identify where traffic is being routed more slowly along the route, thereby explaining where your transaction is being slowed down...




It does appear, if you have a 27K fiber, and you bend it in half - that, wormhole affect is factually null and void. Now, if you bend it too far - and hear a 'snap', the wormhole affect is 'Completely Borked' - and you get absolutely now transmission. We did find, interesting enough, that if you cut that 27K fiber down to a few feet - life happens quicker!

We have come to the conclusion, that: a physically shorter distance creates a better performing speed of light.

(db) - with the barking assistance of a shock-collared Einstein!

[/ QUOTE ]
 
[ QUOTE ]

Actually, the speed of light has already been broken using quantum tunneling :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3303699/We-have-broken-speed-of-light.html



[/ QUOTE ]

Wow Jon, that's interesting. Better than our usual Freaky Friday posts.

BTW - I reread my last sarcastic post. I wasn't implying that you or Danny were in the "supposed CNC consultant" category. You guys are the real deal. (well you are, the jury is still out on Danny
grin.gif
)

I was referring to the "one post wonders" that crop up from time to time that list themselves as CNC consultants....

Those guys are the ones that are fun to flame. Danny is fun to flame too, but that's just recreational.....
 
The breaking of the speed of light by quantum computers begs the question - does the quantum computer solve instructions before they're sent to it?

One theory is that quantum computers, like the "light slit" experiment, tap into a "multiverse" - parallel universes that these theoretically provide proof of interference. As such, would instructions sent to a computer be mixed up with those in a different, parallel universe? Then you could add 2+2 and get the answer 3, 4 or 5 !
 
Back
Top