Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Actinic Link for Sage Line 50 slow on network

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Actinic Link for Sage Line 50 slow on network

    We use sage Line 50 V10 on a network with Actinic Link (Latest Version) to import orders from 4 stores.

    Developer 6 is installed on one workstation along with Actinic Link. The problem is the import speed is very slow. Typically when we have 4 or 5 users logged on to sage, although they have acceptable speed, when we run the link it takes at least one to one and a half minutes to post each order. This means if we have 2 or three orders each from each storeand we want to download them every half hour (as we do in the afternoons to meet dispatch times) the whole process is very slow. We have used other Sage SDO module products in the past and found the same speed issues but not quite as bad.

    We have spoken to Sage to check our network and Sage setup is optimised.

    We think it is unlikely to be a hardware issue, We have a Xeon server with 1GB ECC memory and U320 SCSI hard disk operating on Windows 2000 SBS . Connection is by gigabit switched network and the work stations (7 total 5 Sage users) are all PIII 1000 with windows XP Pro, 512 MB RAM and 7200 rpm UDMA 100 disks.

    Each workstation has the Sage Line 50 accounts folder on the server mapped as a network drive, One workstation has Actinic Link and Developer 6 installed.

    We have noticed that export from sage via the Actinic Link module is quite fast it is only the posting of orders that is slow.

    We know we could speed things up considerably by running link and developer on the server but this is something we would not want to do, neither would we want to make a workstation the 'server' for sage line 50.

    Any suggestions or comments would be greatly appreciated, thanks.

    Paul Lisseter

    #2
    Hi there.

    We have indentified a performance problem when running Sage link on a network, this should be addressed in v2.0.7 of Sage link, unfortunately I do not have a release date as yet.

    May I ask if you are using Sage invoice numbers or not?
    Darren

    SellerDeck

    www.sellerdeck.co.uk

    Comment


      #3
      Thanks for the reply.

      Yes we do use sage order/invoice numbers

      Paul

      Comment


        #4
        Hi there.

        Thanks for the info, we were having a problem where Sage index numbers were not used. I will have a word with our development team.

        In the meantime we could try to do to improve performance is to compact the Actinic databases. To do this, please go to Housekeeping | Compact databases. Select both Catalog and shipping.

        You can also repair the Sage database by going to File | Maintenance | Re-Index database.

        I would strongly recommend creating a snapshot in Actinic and backing up your Sage data before compressing or reindexing!

        Hope this helps
        Darren

        SellerDeck

        www.sellerdeck.co.uk

        Comment


          #5
          Hi there.

          The developers have informed me that the issue should hopefully be addressed in a future release of link, no further details at this stage I am afraid, but keep an eye on www.actinic.co.uk for future releases.
          Darren

          SellerDeck

          www.sellerdeck.co.uk

          Comment


            #6
            Any Progress?

            Paul,

            I wondered if you'd managed to make any progress with this problem? We are having a very similar issue.

            Thanks,

            Steve.

            Comment


              #7
              Things got a lot better when we moved to the new version of Link. The old version used to take about half a minute to post each order. The new version is almost instantaneous on our system.

              Hope this helps

              Comment


                #8
                Thanks for your advice Paul! Did you get better performance with ODBC or SDO? Did it make any difference?

                Steve.

                Comment

                Working...
                X