 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussionsAccessExcelInfoPathOutlookPowerPointPublisherWordDirectoryUser Groups Related Topics Outlook ExpressInternet ExplorerWindowsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ... |
MS Office Forum / Outlook / Business Contact Manager / August 2008Troubles with BCM 2007
Hello, We have a few problems with BCM2007 (environment: Office 2007, Exchange 2007, Vista & XP, all updates). We are about 15 working with BCM2007. 1. Project task in to-do list Something is not working correctly. One sees project tasks from other people. One does not see all own project tasks. Some project tasks appear unattributed although they are. This is a huge problem and people complain they can't use BCM2007 because of it. The only way is by way of reports, which really isn't a solution. Any ideas? 2. In an account, there is a list of linked contacts. The list does not appear the same to all people, some have a list that doesn't have a the fields. This looks like a memory leak to me as the best way to get the right list is to shutdown and restart outlook. 3. Sometime the database connection is interrupted. 4. Default view for "Business Contacts in BCM" Many people complain they can't find contacts. The problem is always the same: they are using a filtered view. But it seems that BCM / Outlook is always reverting to its choice view, and not the one chosen by the user. How can I define the default view for good? 5. Enter key is taboo. We have noticed that when searching for a contact, using the enter key after filling a search field was a very good way to crash BCM. Instead, I tell people to use the mouse to click on the magnifying glass. Is it possible to make the Enter key work? 6. Too slow. When people are using BCM too fast (opening forms, following links, ...) BCM crashes. BCM only works with user using a slow tempo. Is it possible to change this? Thanks, Cedric Hi, I have the same problems with outlook and BCM 2007. The performance is very poor. Users are complaining on the performance. I have XP and Vista but nog difference. Also do I have some problems if i create a task on a Account. If I created a task every thing is ok but when I modify this task the task wil disapear from my task list. The only way to get the task back is to delete the old one an create a new one. Has somebody have an idee to solve this? TIA Toon > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Thanks, > Cedric Sounds like maybe you have some users using the Local DB/Sync option and some using Direct to DB. There is a lag between updates to sync the local db and server side. Change everyone Direct. Can't remember where that option is. Probably under database tools. --wjs > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > Thanks, > Cedric Hi WIlliam, I check your suggestion but I cannot find the option in BCM or outlook. Only the "office settings option" I found where you can set the synchronisation time from 1 till 30 minutes. But changing these settings have no result. Also in the database tools of BCM there is no option to set the Localdb/sync option. Any other suggestion? TIA regards Toon > Sounds like maybe you have some users using the Local DB/Sync option and > some using Direct to DB. There is a lag between updates to sync the local [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > Thanks, > > Cedric When you originally connected to your database, it asked if you wanted to keep a local copy (i.e. ost). If you close your BCM database then reconnect, you can choose the direct mode. HOWEVER, I'm wondering the opposite might be true. I'm having the slow performance (to the point of BCM being un-useable in category view) and I'm wondering if having a locally cached copy would help. > Hi WIlliam, > [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > > Thanks, > > > Cedric I wondered the same thing. After installing on 4 in my office, I did not notice much difference from the clock on the wall. But maybe it would help a bit. I would just worry about yet another failure point and having to deal with sync issues (or out-of-sync issues). Sure it may work fine for a month, but what happens when there is an error? I know sql is pretty hard good, but something to wonder about. > When you originally connected to your database, it asked if you wanted to > keep a local copy (i.e. ost). If you close your BCM database then [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] >> > > Thanks, >> > > Cedric William, I did some testing last night. I appears that working in cached mode wasn't any faster, but I couldn't tell if I was actually working off the cached copy. I did have a breakthrough when I exported my database from the server and then imported it into a blank BCM database locally. I had no preformance issues at all. So, what does that tell us, and how can we get the real problem fixed? I'm working on a gigabit connect to a server with cpu to spare, so those are not the bottlenecks. We're going to test it on a server running a full copy of sql rather than sql express and see if that helps. > I wondered the same thing. After installing on 4 in my office, I did not > notice much difference from the clock on the wall. But maybe it would help [quoted text clipped - 94 lines] > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Cedric On Apr 23, 6:36 am, joesmith <joesm...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote: > William, > I did some testing last night. I appears that working in cached mode wasn't [quoted text clipped - 106 lines] > > - Show quoted text - If this happens: > I did have a breakthrough when I exported my database from the > server and then imported it into a blank BCM database locally. > I had no preformance issues at all. Then the issue may be deleted items. All the records in the deleted items folder are still indexed, and otherwise treated like regular database records, but they don't get exported, so the new database would not have them. I don't think Sql express vs regular sql will make much of a difference unless you have many users attached to a single database. I too thought about deleted items. I had 6000 of them, but I deleted them and defragged the database. Didn't help performance. > On Apr 23, 6:36 am, joesmith <joesm...@discussions.microsoft.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 122 lines] > I don't think Sql express vs regular sql will make much of a > difference unless you have many users attached to a single database. That tells me it is network overhead in general. Using a local copy, your using a memory comm channel. Remotely, you have a lot more layers to go up and down. If it should account for that much time, not sure. Would need more detailed picture of the time at each layer to know for sure. That would require a lot of diag and perf testing (or special sw tools that cost $$). Not sure why cached mode would be slow too, unless they are still doing some network checks on each transaction for some reason (maybe they have stale code that needs to be removed or something). One thing we know for sure. You always pay some tax for going over the network, regardless of network speed. Actually, the speed of the network is normally *not the speed issue in terms of percentages - it is the round-trip time on both sides and server side processing time. > William, > I did some testing last night. I appears that working in cached mode [quoted text clipped - 125 lines] >> >> > > Thanks, >> >> > > Cedric Hi WIlliam, I check the option once again but I cannot find a "direct of local" option. But I already found out that the performance will speed up once you put the server name in de hosts file of the client. But outlook 2007 will stay slow once and while. Is there already a new service pack for office 2007? Because I have clients without BCM2007 and they have also a bad performance with outlook. Regards Toon > I wondered the same thing. After installing on 4 in my office, I did not > notice much difference from the clock on the wall. But maybe it would help [quoted text clipped - 94 lines] > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Cedric I found something that WORKED! I had upgraded from Office 2003 to Office 2007. A co-worker had a clean install of Office 2007. He didn't have performance issues with BCM. So...I uninstalled ALL Office, BCM and related software and reinstalled Office 2007 and BCM. It works MUCH better. > Hi WIlliam, > [quoted text clipped - 105 lines] > > >> > > Thanks, > > >> > > Cedric I have some new computers that started out with a clean install of office 2007, not an upgrade from 2003, and they still have the same problem of outlook/word editor freezing up whenever someone updates a contact in the BCM database on our server. > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Thanks, > Cedric Please see the suggestion in this thread for improving performance. Increasing the polling interval seems to have a large beneficial effect for most users. http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.outlook.bcm/browse_thread/thread /4f67240caf19f069 HTH, Chris [msft] |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.