Running OneWorld accros multiple sites

Please help.....
I've got someone in my department who has made there own assessment of JDEdwards and drew the conclusion that there were few customers running JDEdwards at multiple sites over a WAN or using replatcation.

I know you are out there, please help me prove to this person you really do exist.

Sue
Xe, Update 6, sp18.1 Oracle 8.1.7, NT

Hello Sue,
We are based in Canada. We have several fat clients in US, Germany and UK. Our sites are connected by WAN. We don't use Citrix or web-clients. Old plain fat clients work pretty well.

Regards, Alexander Shevchenko
XE, Oracle, Sun Solaris

There are very few customers that SHOULD be using Fat Clients and Replication - both of which are technologies that were originally created when we had nothing better to offer.

Am I biased on this ? Well, I was the person who introduced Citrix to JDE and created the initial whitepaper that propelled Citrix and Terminal Servers to the top of the pile - so does this make me biased ?

Well - put it this way - in OneWorld there is a type of replication called "non" replication. You'll still see this type of replication being referred to as a method of distributing data reliably over a WAN. I was the creator of Non Replication - first discussed in the 1997 JD Edwards Whitepaper "WAN and Distributed Environments". Back then, I was a proponent of replication and using the internal JD Edwards technology to implement OneWorld across WAN infrastructure technology - however, when Citrix appeared, it was extremely evident there was a huge factor in cost reduction AND manageability - the two reasons that propelled the Citrix architecture to the top spot and meant that companies could certainly create large, scalable implementation implementations successfully.

Lets look at each of the reasons.

First of all, Network Traffic.

A 5 line sales order - in a 2-Tier Environment - generates approximately 1mb of Traffic through approximately 1,000 SQL Statements. With a WAN T1 connection of 50ms - this means a FAT Client would take 50 seconds to perform the sales order transaction for the latency alone - and an additional 20 seconds or so for the network traffic. Thats a total of 70 seconds to create a 5 line sales order.

In comparison, the same Citrix session (set to 16 colors, cached bitmaps etc etc) - would send no more than 75k of traffic - and the maximum latency would be 50ms. This means more network bandwidth is handed back to the company for other things - and if the network becomes busy (with Microsoft Outlook network traffic, for example) it would not severely impact the end user.

Realistically, in a large environment, 1000 users would transmit the equivalent of 1000Mb of data if each user created a 5 line sales order in a Two Tier environment - whereas in a Citrix environment, the total data transmitted would be 7.5Mb. A big difference indeed.

So - what about manageability. Well, if you distribute data around your enterprise - you will certainly encounter issues with data corruption if your replication software is not configured correctly. Secondly, for 1000 users - you would have to install 1000 copies of Oneworld and "push" out packages to each user. If you regularly perform development and want to ensure your users are running optimally, that probably means 1000 package deployments on a monthly basis (and each deployment is 2Gb of data). Of course, it is possible to set up multi-tiered deployment - but why bother ?

Then you have to maintain multiple "workgroup" servers out at all of the branches - a nightmare to say the least, and if you're like a couple of companies I know of, that would require hiring multiple DBA's to maintain a web of database servers. You also need to purchase additional Database Server Licenses, purchase expensive desktops on a much more regular basis - the list goes on and on.

Instead, use a simple Windows 2000 server - total cost of approximately $8000 in Hardware, together with a total cost of approximately $5000 in Microsoft licences and about the same in Citrix licenses (less than $20,000) - and you've got a Citrix Server that can easily support 40 concurrent sessions. Slap together a nice infrastructure package with reliable network connectivity, as well as thin clients for the users - and you've got a nice return on investment solution that can be expensed over a 3 year period.

The HTML Websphere solution works just as well - everything is centralized, there are some initial software and hardware costs (which, of course, are depreciated over time) - and you have the same scalability and ease of use.

Why would anyone want to attempt to maintain a FAT Client environment with Data Replication today is confusing to me - when a financial reduction and a manageable environment are your two rewards.

Of course, there ARE those companies who might want to keep away from the Thin Client models to keep their very large IT department busy...

Sue...

Do you want the list by number of users or alphabetically. Of course you
can run it at multiple sites and over WAN links.

Jim
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 17:56:04 -0800 (PST) spranes <[email protected]>
writes:
I've got someone in my department who has made there

I know you are out there, please help me prove

Sue
Xe, Update 6, sp18.1 Oracle

________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

Hello Sue,
I am another site that uses JDE over a WAN. I am based in Northern Canada, (NWT to be precise) and have client machines in Montreal, Calgary, Inuvik, Iqaluit and Tuktoyaktuk. Most of these clients connect to my Citrix box using the Internet (satellite connections) and VPN. It works very well.

Hope this helps your case.

Regards,
Harry

I'd be happy to see a list by # of users Stooge !

30 + Sites using WAN and Web, not replication.
Deliverd via Citrix and NFuse. Works great!
--- spranes <[email protected]> wrote:
http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=OW&Number=52667


=====
Dan Eppich
The Anschutz Corporation
XE Coexistant, V5R1 w/central objects
SP20
Optio DCS 7.7.3
Fat and Citrix ICA via NFUSE

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

Just to clarify....We are running OneWorld currently at 1 location and using Citrix for access. I am planning to roll OneWorld out to two sites - 1 US and 1 international. I am being challenged by my network guys that OneWorld is not an Enterprise application and should not be deployed this way - via Citrix & I should prove to them others are deployed across multiple sites with thin client access.

I will not say what I really think of this request, but any help you all can provide me with gathering the metric of how many sites and # of user would be very helpful.

I have three sites, 1 US, 2 International (two different countries). I ended up installing at each site separately due to localization issues and network bandwidth issues. Our non-US locations are located in unpopulated areas. I would have rather had one installation but circumstances didn't allow that.

Hi again Sue,

Here are my 'Stats':

Site 1 (Tuk): 5 users using 32k Frame Relay link.
Site 2 (Inuvik) 2 users using Internet (via DSL)
Site 3 (Iqaluit) 2 users using Internet (via dialup)
Site 4 (Montreal area) 2-3 users using Internet (via DSL/Cable)
Site 5 (Calgary) 5 users using VPN between Firewalls. (Maybe switching to Frame in near future.)
Main Site (Hay River)
Subsite 1: 25 users on WAN connecting to Main office via 11mbs wireless
Subsite 2: 6 users on WAN connecting by 11mbs Wireless

Plus I have several execs who travel and connect by whatever is available at their Hotel.

Granted, I am a very small JDE site, (20 -25 users on JDE at any one time), but with Citrix it has worked out very well.

Email me at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Regards,
Harry

Anything to make you happy Jon.....


525
215
1182
47
2249
16
3333
25

Anything else??

Jim
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:18:18 -0800 (PST) altquark <[email protected]>
writes:

________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

The client I am currently helping supports 1500+ users this way at dozens of remote sites.

Another client I have worked with supports 250 this way.

Every established client I have talked to with remote sites does it this way.

These clients all use a single instance of OneWorld to support multiple sites.

Sue,

Your lan guys need to do their homework. I manage Praxair's North American JDE installation. 2300 users and growing. Users in: United States, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Belgium, Spain, France. Fourteen production terminal servers. Users connecting over a LAN, WAN, Dial-up, and Secure internet connection. Don't ask me how many locations, there are too many to list. We are implimenting a OneWorld server for China that will be hosted in the US. We have OneWorld running in Brazil supporting South America. We have OneWorld running in Milan Italy supporting European operation. We have OneWorld running in Singapore supporting four Asian countries.

We were an early adopter of citrix, it has done very well. We are now in the process of adopting HTML to provide an alternate channel for our far-flung users. I guess that qualifies JDE as an enterprise application, huh?

Gregg Larkin
Praxair North American CNC

Gregg

Have you checked the legality of running systems within China on a server
based in another country? I think China and Sweden both require the data
server to be sited within their borders. Things may have changed in the
last couple of years making me out of date, but it might be worth checking
nonetheless.

regards
Sid Perkins
Independent IT Consultant

[email protected]

----- Original Message -----
From: "gregglarkin" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: Running OneWorld accros multiple sites


American JDE installation. 2300 users and growing. Users in: United
States, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Belgium, Spain, France. Fourteen
production terminal servers. Users connecting over a LAN, WAN, Dial-up, and
Secure internet connection. Don't ask me how many locations, there are too
many to list. We are implimenting a OneWorld server for China that will
be hosted in the US. We have OneWorld running in Brazil supporting South
America. We have OneWorld running in Milan Italy supporting European
operation. We have OneWorld running in Singapore supporting four Asian
countries. We were an early adopter of citrix, it has done very well. We
are now in the process of adopting HTML to provide an alternate channel for
our far-flung users. I guess that qualifies JDE as an enterprise
application, huh?Gregg LarkinPraxair North American CNC

Umm - Sid, what are you referring to ?

Is it therefore illegal to access data in China that is located on a server in, say the US ? Would that mean that the majority of the Internet is illegal in China ? Would the same be said about Sweden ?

I know I have heard issues in China, but I have never heard issues concerning users in Sweden accessing the Internet.

I'll be very interested in hearing your response on this.

Gregg - good to hear from you - I spoke to spranes directly regarding your implementation !!! (I was the poor SOB who had to do the upgrade proposal with Joe, just before you joined I think !!!)

Ok Jim, can we see the list by customer name ?

Jon

I am not referring to the internet, rather corporate data for organisations
physically trading in China and Sweden. So, where an organisation trades in
that country and wishes to hold electronic data relative to that business,
the servers should be locally based. That is not the same as someone in
Guangzhou ordering a book from Amazon for instance.

As I said in the original response, this was true for both countries up to a
couple of years back and may have changed since. So, I still recommend
double checking to be on the safe side. I hope this makes things a wee bit
clearer.

best regards
Sid Perkins
Independent IT Consultant
[email protected]

----- Original Message -----
From: "altquark" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2003 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: Running OneWorld accros multiple sites


data in China that is located on a server in, say the US ? Would that mean
that the majority of the Internet is illegal in China ? Would the same be
said about Sweden ?I know I have heard issues in China, but I have never
heard issues concerning users in Sweden accessing the Internet.I'll be very
interested in hearing your response on this.Gregg - good to hear from you -
I spoke to spranes directly regarding your implementation !!! (I was the
poor SOB who had to do the upgrade proposal with Joe, just before you joined
I think !!!)

Jon,

There are a number of "Data Protection Acts" out there. This conversation has come up a couple of times on the list. Each act generally talks about transporting personally identifiable information to third parties in other countries. I believe that Sweden would be affected by both the EU data protection act and Sweden's own data protect act or equivalent. Generally data that belongs to a single company or group of sibling companies across the globe are allowed to transfer data or provide remote access to data as needed. I am not an expert on this but I as it has come up a bit I have done a little research. It all comes down to how the data is stored and secured. As long as the information is for use withing a group of related companies there usually no legal issue. I would say that to be sure each case should be looked at individually by a qualified attorney. The lawyers always make out ... not something we techies should really be asked to deal with.

Regards,

Hey Jon

My boss Joe still has a workflow chart on his wall of our migration from 7.31 to XE with your name listed for various steps in the migration.

Sue, if your IT guys are still unconvinced, I have a buddy in Wisconson who's company has even more remote countries than Praxair does. They took a different approach, they have a monstor 12 way AS400 at the core of their system with users connecting in through terminal servers from around the world.

Sid, Praxair is positively thick with lawyers. I'm sure they've looked into that. Apparently they looked into it a while ago because the China project is an upgrade from World to Oneworld. Their AS400 for running World is located in Singapore. They looked at locating it in Singapore but could get a cheaper WAN contract with the US. The other major factor is staff. We have an all-star lineup of developers here in the US to support North American and Global implimentations of JDE. At times I feel like I'm working at the UN, our JDE staff here in Buffalo is drawn from: US, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, India, and Korea.

Pretty Cool!

Gregg Larkin
Praxair CNCguy. Delegate from the US contingent.

We are the 12 way Gregg is talking about. We actually are only running 8 at the moment. The other 4 are to keep performance stable as we ramp up in more of the world.

We use Citrix and the 'W' environment (I know Jon you don't necessarially agree, but we see significant performance improvements). We are servicing 13 countries on 3 continenets (Europe, North America, and Asia) and are currently planning on bringing up South America this summer.

We run Citrix EVERYWHERE even where we host the servers. The only Fat clients we use are for the developers and CNC. We use NFUSE for acccess to Citrix. Works great.

For the QZDASOINIT guys we run at 1700 connectsion base, and start 100 more when we have 50 idle. My peak is around 1900 currently.

Today we start a project to validate the HTML client, with the hope that we can reduce the number of Citrix servers. This project is slated to run through June.

Our major issue with running OW across multiple sites is always printing. We have learned that just because the printer is an 'ACME 1234' it matters where it is actually purchased. So we require that each country that wants customer reports (in effect every one), purchase an extra one and ship it to our corporate headquarters where we do development.

Hope this adds something usefull.

Tom Davidson