Process Mapping Logo

Process Mapping - Forums

Sharing 19 years of knowledge and experience

 
Metastorm BPM forums
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


 
Poll Results
 
 Is 901 Suitable for a live deployment?
 Yes - its seems stable enough with sufficient functionality 2 66%
 No - there are concerns 1 33%
 View Voters
Total votes: 3. This poll has been closed.


Reply
  Author   Comment  
JasonG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 54
Reply with quote  #1 
What are peoples throughts in general regarding the performance and capabilities of 901?

I'm particularly interested to hear thoughts on functionality comparisons (I see quite a few posts already regarding "dropped" functionality), bugs and performance - with regards to trying to migrate/re-write 7.x procedures.

From a personal viewpoint under a days initial testing has raised concerns on VM performance (like for like with a 7.6 image), missing functionality and Web Client errors - and is making me re-think the project to adopt/begin on this release and would be good to get a general straw poll on any live/structured testing implementations.
0
Jerome

Avatar / Picture

Guru
Registered:
Posts: 5,507
Reply with quote  #2 
I vote yes, but there are significant issues you need to be aware of. Most relate to new features, such as the 'for each' VS activity just not working, but I have noted and documented that visibility based on Radio Group fields does not work fully, mainly I think when the RG variable is set to empty, cannot recall. There are a few others, but no show-stoppers for us (yet).

Aside from that, you really have to get your head around the Business Objects, and there are various 'types' that are not fully explained (see below) and needing to use a heck of a lot of C# and understand C# compilation and runtime errors when they occur.

BO Types as we call them:
  • Data - RO one record
  • List - RO many records
  • Filt - RO changing records list (so must set to refresh)
  • Edit - editable single record from a table BO
  • Tabl - Editable grid table BO
all behave and are typically used quite differently, so the concept of a Business Object is not a straightforward one.

__________________
Post an example, and we will have a much better idea what the problem is. In about 90% of posts, the problem is one of communication. Examples bridge that gap.
0
Jerome

Avatar / Picture

Guru
Registered:
Posts: 5,507
Reply with quote  #3 
As for concerns about migration, it's a rewrite in my opinion. I have not been able to successfully migrate any library yet, and that breaks most of what we have, as every system we write is heavily based on libraries. The migrated code is not editable as is, so you really have to rewrite any part that needs changing.

We have a guide written a while ago setting out the features gained and lost, and a good strategy to migrate. I shall put it on-line soon .....

__________________
Post an example, and we will have a much better idea what the problem is. In about 90% of posts, the problem is one of communication. Examples bridge that gap.
0
JasonG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 54
Reply with quote  #4 
How about the actual performance - have you noticed much between 76 and 901?  Testing here in mirrored virtualised environments is showing 901 slower despite its compiled nature?

Bug-wise - i've logged about 20 in the last few hours with MS, ranging from control issues (grids, drop downs, calendars) and migration problems, to missing functionality (the inflexibility of the BOs for dynamic structure - this is the biggie for us, multiple services in a single UI) and performance test results.

Agree - migration does not appear to be an option...

In terms of concept and new features I think there are some huge steps forward - they just cant be to the detriment of functional parity and performance.
0
Jerome

Avatar / Picture

Guru
Registered:
Posts: 5,507
Reply with quote  #5 
Client seems pretty damn sluggish to resize, as always, esp when opening forms. When I record demos I can show step by step how the window is created!

What do you mean by "the inflexibility of the BOs for dynamic structure"

BTW, feel free to post faults found here. One of the real pains we all have is battling with an obscure bug, only to be told it is a 'known issue' when you finally track it down.

__________________
Post an example, and we will have a much better idea what the problem is. In about 90% of posts, the problem is one of communication. Examples bridge that gap.
0
JasonG

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 54
Reply with quote  #6 

On the BO side: In 7.x we (and I expect most people) used to do something like: 

%SelectSQL("Select %Variable1, %Variable2, %Variable3 from %Variable2 where %Variable3")

where variables stored or built up dynamic constructs for sql commands, which could include table, field names, or even entire statements - all relatively simply:

%SelectSQL("%Variable1)

So the above and anything in between in terms of dynamic Exec/Select to populate dropdowns, grids, etc.  From what we've tried so far binding unknown tables/columns based on variables (local preferably) to controls seems either confusing or not possible.

I'll post bugs as soon as Metastorm support confirm them, just to make sure its not just our environment.


For performance, initial side by side gave us:

Initial Processing seems the same:

1. The time to get to the log in page: 7.6=2 seconds, 9.01=2 seconds

2. The time to process log in: 7.6=2 seconds, 9.01=2 seconds

3. The time to navigate from To Do to Blank Forms: 7.6=< 1 second, 9.01=<1 second

 

But then:

4. The time to load a BPM Blank form that has cached: 7.6=< 1 second, 9.01=2 seconds

5. Time to cancel a form: 7.6=< 1 second, 9.01=1 second

6. Set the timeout in the DB to 0 - leave the ui for say 30 minutes, click on To Do (when Blank forms is displayed: 7.6=3 seconds, 9.01=6 seconds

7. Immediately after test 6, open a folder from the To Do list: 7.6= 2 seconds, 9.01=8 seconds

 

The Administration console is slower still, taking a minimum of 3 seconds to do any screen click (expand/collapse users, page, filter, etc).

The designer seeks to eat resources, taking half a gig just after opening and working on a relatively simple procedure for 60 minutes.


 
0
Jerome

Avatar / Picture

Guru
Registered:
Posts: 5,507
Reply with quote  #7 
Yup, 'tis true.

We build dynamic SQL to insert folder ids into a common FolderQuery table, and build the BO against that. Indexes get fragmented, but it is not too bad if managed every day or so.

__________________
Post an example, and we will have a much better idea what the problem is. In about 90% of posts, the problem is one of communication. Examples bridge that gap.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!