IDS 9.30 HC on a 64-bit HP server

Hello My client is getting cold feet about the live configuration to which they are moving. Does anyone have any reassurance, or warnings, they have to offer from direct experience?: HP-UX 11.11 on an rp7400 ('N' class as was); IDS 9.30 HC5; 4GL 7.31 UC8. Yes, I know they could be using an FC version of IDS, but they aren't for reasons of application support. thanks! -- Neil Truby t:01932 724027 Director m:07798 811708 Ardenta Limited e:neil.truby@ardenta.com

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:31:40 -0000, "Neil Truby" <neil.truby@ardenta.com> wrote: >Hello > >My client is getting cold feet about the live configuration to which they >are moving. Does anyone have any reassurance, or warnings, they have to >offer from direct experience?: > >HP-UX 11.11 on an rp7400 ('N' class as was); IDS 9.30 HC5; 4GL 7.31 UC8. > >Yes, I know they could be using an FC version of IDS, but they aren't for >reasons of application support. > Ahhh, Lawson again??? Anyway, we've been using the HC port of IDS on the L class box for a while with no issues. HPUX 11i; IDS 9.30.HC3; 4gl 7.30.HC7 on an HP L2000. anything specific??

Not Lawson, for a change! Different client. I don't know exactly what they're looking for, except that they are changing IDS, the hardware and HP-UX all at the same time, have already eschewed the 64-bit engine they should be using, and want to know of anything nasty that may bite them in the arse. There is a slight nervousness I think because, in the UK at any rate, IBM Informix support sometimes don't tell you about known problems until you raise a specific support call: that is, there's no point in asking them for known problems on a given configuration but, when you raise a call, be prepared to be told (after a week or so) "Oh yes, that's known bug 123456". "John Carlson" <john_carlson@whsmithusa.com> wrote in message news:07p4rvgnjaeh4jp4bm5bc5udruvhd1dq6s@4ax.com... > On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:31:40 -0000, "Neil Truby" > <neil.truby@ardenta.com> wrote: > > >Hello > > > >My client is getting cold feet about the live configuration to which they > >are moving. Does anyone have any reassurance, or warnings, they have to > >offer from direct experience?: > > > >HP-UX 11.11 on an rp7400 ('N' class as was); IDS 9.30 HC5; 4GL 7.31 UC8. > > > >Yes, I know they could be using an FC version of IDS, but they aren't for > >reasons of application support. > > > > Ahhh, Lawson again??? > > Anyway, we've been using the HC port of IDS on the L class box for a > while with no issues. > > HPUX 11i; IDS 9.30.HC3; 4gl 7.30.HC7 on an HP L2000. > > anything specific??

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:58:50 -0000, "Neil Truby" <neil.truby@ardenta.com> wrote: >Not Lawson, for a change! Different client. > >I don't know exactly what they're looking for, except that they are changing >IDS, the hardware and HP-UX all at the same time, have already eschewed the >64-bit engine they should be using, and want to know of anything nasty that >may bite them in the arse. There is a slight nervousness I think because, >in the UK at any rate, IBM Informix support sometimes don't tell you about >known problems until you raise a specific support call: that is, there's no >point in asking them for known problems on a given configuration but, when >you raise a call, be prepared to be told (after a week or so) "Oh yes, >that's known bug 123456". > > I see. The 'pre-emptive strike', then, I presume? Too bad Tech Support didn't have something out there (version specific) that we could review.