Small Business Server

[MacolaHelp]

Macola officially does not support SBS, citing the service load as causing performance degradation. Many network folks I know pooh-pooh this & think Macola's out to lunch on this matter. I also know a couple of people who have had problems with SBS. Since it's not supported, I'm very leery about letting this network fellow put it in at a client I have who is migrating off novell 4.1 & retiring the last of their 95 workstations.

Anyone have a good experience w/SBS? And is it worth using it versus perhaps not getting macola support if we have performance issues? I'd just as soon avoid running a server that macola doesn't support.

And what do you think about the possibility of running ES on SBS? That seems like an accident waiting to happen.

 

[kscheeler]

I just worked with a client (10 to 15 users) who had thought about SBS. I ended up talking them into getting a Windows2003 server.

My concern is the possible side effects vs. the cost savings over a few years. Is saving $2,000 +/- enough to warrant a possible issue later on. If you have to bring in a hardware/software tech for $1,000 to $1,500 per day to resolve issues, have you saved anything in the long run.

Also, you have to look at it as this is the computer/software is running their business. If it falls short, their business gets hurt.

Kevin Scheeler

 

[crystalreporting]

I'm not sure about the 'Macola doesn't support it' statement, I thought they wouldn't quote hardware requirements etc. for SBS because of the other components involved (Exchange, SQL etc.). We have a couple of clients using SBS with Macola - bang for the buck, it's a much more attractive proposition for most of our customers, particularly given the size of most Macola users. The only no-no that I am aware of is that SBS has to be the primary domain controller - no ifs, ands or buts. If you have a client where the Macola server is NOT the PDC, then you're going to have to change some things around as SBS wants to be the PDC. Aside from that, no problems or issues that I'm aware of, and certainly nothing that would negate the benefits and cost savings of SBS.

Peter Shirley

http://www.linkcorp.com

 

[dgillz]

We also have a few clients using SBS and we are able to get support for it.

Software Sales, Training, Implementation and Support for Exact Macola, eSynergy, and Crystal Reports

http://www.trianglepartners.com

 

[MacolaHelp]

Per the supported platforms doc:

Microsoft Windows 2000 Small Business Server Edition support will be limited to process functionality only. Because SBS combines many high-load functions including Exchange Server, SQL Server, IIS, Proxy, Remote Access, Web server, Fax Server, etc. performance cannot be guaranteed and therefore issue concerning performance of Progression on SBS will not be addressed.

I know that running macola on the pdc degrades its performance as opposed to being on its own server & every service added slows the processing down. Maybe the servers are powerful enough now that it's not an issue. The macola licensing is also written that the app will be on its own server.

 

[kscheeler]

For the number of users you would have to warrant SBS, you would not have to install the Macola app on a seperate server.

Kevin Scheeler

 

[MacolaHelp]

What do you think the target # of users is on SBS? This client (20 users) wants to start w/pervasive, upgrade to current macola version, then upgrade to sql, then ES & they are adding remote access from offsite warehouse via terminal services. Is this a realistic path on SBS? Seems like we'd be putting a lot of stuff on one server. If we start w/SBS & find that macola performance is dreadful, then we would have to buy another heavy duty server to run macola es on sql, right, since SBS wants to be the pdc no matter what?

 

[kscheeler]

Is this client just implementing Macola? If that was the case, why would you want to sell them Pervasive vs. SQL.

With 20 users, you would only need 1 server. You would want to look at the number of transactions the user is doing and what modules they are going to use. Are they Acct/Dist, full or lite mfg, edi, etc..

One of my clients only has about 10 users in the system but handles about 100 to 150 orders a day with multiple line items.

I would not use SBS with that number of users. I think SBS max's out at a 25 user count but I would verify that. Have you figured out the cost savings by going with SBS instead of Windows2003 server?

Kevin Scheeler

 

[dgillz]

The SBS vs Windows 2000 Server vs Windows 2003 server issue aside, if they want to go to ES, why not just go there from day one?

If I am reading this correctly and this is a new site, hence no data conversion from 7.6 to ES, this is by far the easiest thing to do. In fact this would be the accident waiting to happen, IMHO.

Software Sales, Training, Implementation and Support for Exact Macola, eSynergy, and Crystal Reports

http://www.trianglepartners.com

 

[MacolaHelp]

These folks have been running macola for years & are stuck right now on novell 4.11/pervasive 2000i sp3/macola103f & (some) win95 workstations. Spending $$ is an issue here. So, to ease the transition financially & logically, I'd like to move to supported servers and WS with minimum disruption to the end users. These folks can't figure out how to log on to their network if I log in as admin & forget to change the user name back to the one who typically logs into the workstation . . .

So, a fresh ES install is not an option. No in house IS expertise there, so I'm not prepared to convert to MSSQL just yet: I'd rather have them buy the psql for now & stabilize, get to 7.6.200, & then tackle the SQL if they have an internal candidate to become DBA (though I'm not hopeful on this one, I might have to do it. If so, I want to be able to do it remotely). Plus, it will require an investment in my time to convert their data. They are using bins & lots together (ask me how well macola functions in this environment!), full accounting (except PR/AD), full dist & MRP.

Since spending $$, whether for training, implementation, or hardware is always an issue here, I need to get the most bang for the buck. If I say SBS will work just fine & we have problems or ES won't run on SBS 2 years from now, I'll be the one giving away support time. I'd rather have them recognize that they need to invest now rather than nickel & dime it over the next 2-3 years.

Is anybody running ES using SBS? Thanks in advance for all your suggestions & help on this one.

 

[kscheeler]

Remember, when you go to a Windows based platform, you'll have to purchase Pervasive again. There isn't an cross platform path for the program and there is an upgrade pricing path.

I wasn't recommending ES but 7.6.100a SQL or 7.6.200 SQL. I've found the conversion between Btrieve and SQL for those two versions to work very well. Obviously, you'll do some testing and change crystal reports if they have any.

You mentioned Win95 workstations. You can't install Macola on a Win95 workstation above 7.6.100. They implemented that in spa.

I have clients where I have SQL running on it's own. When I'm there, I'll check to make sure the SQL maintenance plans have been running but for the most part, it's hands off.

Kevin Scheeler

 

[MacolaHelp]

A pervasive 2000i purchase for a win2k server for either 10 or 20 users is less than the investment in mssql & my consulting time to convert from btrieve to sql. I really haven't had any serious conversion issues in the conversions that I've done, other than data problems to be corrected in the source db from btrieve. However, I'm leery of putting mssql in a site where they have no IT expertise in house. Also, it used to be that SBS could only handle 2 gig of db, which is quickly absorbed in a macola db, but that may be my recollection from v7 mssql rather than mssql 2000. I've found that the db grows about 2x from the initial conversion & seriously thereafter. 2 gigs in nothing in today's world.

I still wonder if macola ES on SBS is viable. I think that if any of our clients (whatever size) are considering ES, that SBS would/should be out of the equation. Maybe I'm thinking ES is more powerful than it really is?