Jump to content

Mark Sollis

Committee
  • Content Count

    467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

Mark Sollis last won the day on 13 March

Mark Sollis had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

36 Excellent

1 Follower

About Mark Sollis

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 04/01/1961

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Company Name
    OneFiftyPercent.com

Contact Methods

  • Twitter Feed = @
    OneFiftyPercent

Recent Profile Visitors

1,991 profile views
  1. Great news - glad to hear some sense has been applied 🙂 I'll drop you a PM here as well - #thoughts
  2. Hi James - any updates on this - really interested to see what the outcome was And FYI for anyone in the same position - I've actually defined the solution that actually works 🙂 - happy days! 😷
  3. Adding new fields does not (should not!) require a bulk insert. If it's the case that anyone needs to, then a fix is required from Open GI imho. The whole premise for th£ upgrad£ to IC "PLUS" was to solv£ the n££d for bulk ins£rts when - tables (frames) were added, fields were changed or, new VT entries made (insurers etc) We all have to demand the best solution and get OGI / help OGI to fix what is broken - otherwise it will never change and we will all be running bulk inserts everyday for the rest our lives - which is what we did before ICPlus was launched. #petpeeves
  4. Wellllllllllllll I'm not sure #OpenGI "support" keyword changes - I suspect it's an oversight but can be useful for sure. Strange that the ICP table is OK but the view is failing - why does 'SELECT * FROM' need to know the column names Yep - sounds like a fault feature that needs to be resolved 🙂
  5. Hi all Anyone using Sanctions check in anger? Had an issue which I couldn't fully resolve or pinpoint where the list is often short of name data. On closer inspection the names are blank when the Forename is not completed (often the case on non-writer products) - and the report seems to "assume" that if there is no forename, then the BCM.Name is irrelevant / not used / not printed. I'm probably completely wrong - I suggested they raise with OGI - just wondered if this is a known factor across the user base? #askingforafriend
  6. Correct - but as @JamesStill says - there are issues if refresh/insert is not run at least weekly which is what he is having to do. The whole point of ICP was this is not a requirement So - I'm with you - that this is a "fault" if problems occur with replication of data - and should be reported to get fixed. Otherwise, its not doing what it's supposed to be doing . Meanwhile - James still need's a solution. Speak to the Account Manager - on both counts and shelve the £xx,000 estimates
  7. Agree - It should be noted however, that the ICP upgrade was promoted (sold?) on the basis the new features meant it wouldn't need a refresh when new tables / frames / insurers / execs were added - so would question any need in those circumstances tbf. Yes - once in a blue Monday moon to make sure all is in synch - but low level hiccups should be managed by the app and it's processes to "catch up" any missing changes As far as the views go, you are correct to maximise performance on SQL tables of a size - but this won't solve the transfer times described by @JamesStill Just needs a bit of lateral thinking to get the right solution at the right cost. Just seems a knee-jerk "Ch***zillion" estimate for a solution that probably could be done better and at lower cost if the issue was better investigated and scoped
  8. Thanks @JamesStill - all makes sense Thennnnnnnnnn thats a fault then isn't it?! If the current ICP solution provides a real time transactional reporting database - then it should operate and be performant. The whole campaign around (and upgrade cost of) ICP was so that bulk insert wasn't required and a data refresh was the exception not the rule. It's what everyone paid for on the upgrade. We need to help OGI get this right and get it fixed to do what it's supposed to do - no help to you right now though ... Your SQL code example in the OP takes up 5 lines of code. BCPL won't be much different IMHO - but I shouldn't question the detail. But yep - 14 days all in @ £x thousands per day + VAT is a lot of dosh for the equivalent 5 lines in BCPL. If I was asking a builder to quote for an extension - I'd like to see the basis of the quote - so I could understand the complexities. Obviously to arrive at a figure there must be some finger in the air guestimate of the work involved. So what is the Schedule Of Works expected upon which their figure is based. No different to a code build - what are the steps and what are the associated estimate for each. Its a fair question if someone is about to spend that sort of money. For a discussion with a developer on other options What if the extract of the BAH was done offline - from the backup file set - and then used to populate / overwrite the SQL BAH table separately? OR How easy is it to have a new (VSAM) table that is a subset of the BAH and holds data based on a Broker Amendment parameter of n Yrs. I wouldn't be surprised if this was 5 days effort all in ... The whole purge issue is one that needs looking at and I believe some of this work is being considered - worth persuing to establish the scope of change in plan / being planned to make sure it is fit for today's integrated environments i.e. IC/ICP wasnt really around when purging was such a hot topic 😐 Whatever the position I'd explore this route first - and if OGI haven't done so or explained why that file is taking so long, then they should. If a dedicated SDD fixes this - then that will be a 3 figure solution, not a multiple of 5 (I'm being optimistic I know, but the principle holds true) If all else fails, one option could be to split the extract file processing. The default initialises the DB but "maybe" it's possible to only initialise a table (in the pre-sql script) and then extract just the BAH table weekly. I'm sure those options have been considered by OGI as lower cost alternative solution .... and maybe they have and dismissed it for good reason. Another fair question though... Overall - a very tech product / area and in reality, only OGI can provide the right solution regardless of my ramblings which are nothing more than conjecture. So there has to be some reliance on and trust given to, the tech provider. Nothing comes for free and you just have to be happy you are getting a fair deal. If it was my business though, I'd still be asking for all the options, alternatives and a best guess breakdown of all costs - and my "supplier" would need to justify their numbers Hope the above helps and let us know how you get on and what route / solution you end up taking
  9. Hi James - hope you are well!! Great question and I'd be glad to offer some options / advice if I can ... First off - 1 - Why are you doing a data refresh? 2 - What is the "custom solution" (i.e. what is the proposed development that will be completed) and what is the cost? 3 - In any event, if you purged the associated Client Policy files prior to 2015 on the server - presume the log would be pruned too - obvs? #interestingtopic PS - nothing, Nothing, NOTHING, NOTHING in our world should take 12 hours to process a single file. Your full back-up OF EVERYTHING doesn't take that long - I presume the bottlenecks were investigated before the "custom solution" was proposed? @Tom Davies @karl @maskelleto
  10. Well that seems strange!!! whats the point of having an agreement between parties if those parties are not entitled to know what the agreement is 🧐 I’ll make sure we clarify at the April meeting. Meanwhile, it would be good to know “what” information will be acceptable to the auditors. They are the ones asking the questions - so what are the questions they want answered? Then we can put those to OGI for their response. #lefthandrighthand
  11. Hi Clare Sorry if your original message went unanswered - I'll try and track down what happened to that! Meanwhile FYI - OGI confirmed that they had responded to Diarmuid and provided detail on the Escrow and how it would be activated. As the Escrow document is held by OGI until such an event occurs, then anyone requiring further info should enquire via their Account Manager in the same way. I am aware that the User Group will be publishing some headline info for reference only - but ultimately the source will be Open GI for the full and best answers on this Hope this helps
  12. Hi Vanessa Couldn't possibly comment on specific contracts or potential tactics - and certainly not in a Pubic Forum!! However .... All businesses driven by sales are prepared to negotiate. Particularly when it's for software they "own" and without any significant "support" overhead. All businesses have to make money - that's why they exist - but how much is too much What's the comparison of cost to these extra licences Vs the existing ones? All businesses have sales cycles - so when is the Month End and will the discount go up the closer to Month End you get? All businesses have a Year End - so will the discount go up the closer to Year End you get? All businesses will negotiate for a bundle - is there anything else you can get thrown in for nearly "free" to make the overall cost worthwhile? I'm sure others have been in a similar position and maybe they can offer some nuggets. Unfortunately it's sometimes down to what the price is "on the day" - as you have already found. Not ideal - but it can depend on what sway you have - and the contract you already have in place. Pricing flex (to extreme) is not unknown in the OGI sales kit-bag - whether that continues to be the case in the future no one knows. Drop me a message if I can help further M
  13. Hi Diarmuid The Escrow is owned by Open GI - the User Group have exclusive access / beneficiaries should an event occur. If you need a copy of the current document, you will probably need to go via your Account Manager. Meanwhile, I'll ask the User Group Committee to raise with OGI at the next meeting to confirm correct approach and contact points if Members require open access to the document - it shouldn't be a secret
  14. Hi Mark Pretty sure Motor can be produced from APM - but Home needs a record in Core back office. It's the crazy world of OGI quirks I'm afraid - a result of some poor decision making a long while ago If I'm off the mark, or there are some alternatives, I'm sure someone will post up some options M
  15. Which line of business Mark? MotorWriter works differently to Home/Truck/Bike You can always create your own of course - for any LOB - but not sure if that's what you are asking?
×
×
  • Create New...