Re: Cutting down GL records -archiving/purging

[Al Mac <macwheel99@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

No tools for archiving CEA if you go exclusively with SSA OSG as your 
supplier.  Different story if you reach out to 3rd party outfits.

You might check BPCS-L discussion archives for BPCS archiving 
products.  There are SEVERAL companies that can archive old BPCS file 
contents in separate library.  The one I am familiar with is UPI, but there 
are others.  You have your data, you can access it using BPCS software.  I 
not know impact on BPCS conversion.  You might have to
(a) use old version of BPCS to access old archives
(b) lease more powerful iSeries box to actually convert the files, assuming 
SSA license for the other box is affordable
(c) convert current stuff right away, convert archives some other weekend

There are also alternatives to SSA conversion.  The one I familiar with is 
from BPCS on S/36 to BPCS V4 on AS/400.

Al Macintyre
This e-mail is no longer confidential.  The archives of BPCS-L are 
available to anyone on the Internet, via Google and other search engines.
In fact trends with hackers and homeland security are such that anyone who 
thinks e-mail can be confidential is living in a different fantasy world 
from mine.

> We are converting from 6.1.2 to 8.2 -- test conversion took too long.  IT 
> is looking at reducing some records so conversion goes faster.
>
> Among other items - they are asking us to reduce our GL files.  Accounting 
> of course does not want to give anything up.  Trying to find a middle of 
> the road.  I have inquired to SSA.  Basically no tools for archiving CEA 
> in our version, but 8.2 does have tools and even the option of purging the 
> detail and leaving the balances - so multi-year trends/comparison would 
> still work.  One file is much larger than all the rest: GXR - Journal 
> Entry Cross reference.  From what I've been able to gather this only comes 
> into play as you continue to drill down in Account Inquiry.  Is this true 
> from your experience?  We have most of the details to cross reference 
> pulled in with the model lines/detail/analysis fields - so we nearly never 
> drill down that far.   Can you think of any impacts - good bad or other 
> wise if we were to reduce this one table GXR and leave the rest of the Gxx 
> tables alone?
>
> Wendy Bunch
> This is an e-mail from Wabash Technologies, Incorporated.
> It is confidential to the ordinary user of the above e-mail address.
> It may contain copyright and/or legally privileged information.
> No other person may read, print, store, copy, forward,
> or act in reliance on it or its attachments.  If you received this in 
> error, please e-mail to humanresources@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx