TM1 Forum

Wow, take a chill pill, dude! In the opening post I already noted that one server was virtualised, one is not. While I did mention in that last post that they have different RAM, CPUs, etc., it's not that significant a different. The physical machine has 4GB RAM, the virtual machine (currently) has ...

Hi there Tomok,

Well, it's difficult to necessarily compare the servers explicitly as they do have different amounts of RAM, different CPU quantity, etc. Plus, one is virtualised, one is not. The virtual server, though, does have the recommended size swap file configured.

Cheers,
Craig

Hi guys, Tried some tweaks of the VMM and VMT settings - hasn't made any difference to the particular views, on particular servers, that still take a long time to build each time their accessed and have tm1sd.exe cranking away on the CPU. Is there debug/logging that I can access or enable to would g...

Interestingly, this post, which came up in the search results ( http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=14459357&tstart=0 ) appears to be explaining the same problem that I'm experiencing - although, as I've noted, it doesn't happen on a different server with the same vers...

Hi there Duncan, I'll take a look at some of the web links. I had put a ViewConstruct call in for the particular view that seems to be causing the issue most frequently, but even after re-running the related process it still takes a very long time for the view to open. I will take a look at those ca...

Hi there Lotsaram, Thanks for your comments. My experience with TM1 is not extensive, however as I mentioned in my post the high CPU is occurring on some views on in SOME circumstances. The same views on different servers do load quickly for some, but with high CPU usage for others. If it was the sa...

Hi guys, I'm wondering if anyone has experienced a similar issue to what I'm seeing, or can give me a pointer on what the cause might be. We've recently built a couple of new Cognos Express 9.5 servers (both with Windows 2008 Server R2 as the OS), to migrate a TM1 9.1 installation. One server was bu...

Actually, I may just leave it for the moment, until Finance confirms whether it's right or not. You're correct that the existing rule for actually calculating the "9510" amount (from "NPAT") is using SUBST(!Period, 5, 2) != "01", which must somehow indicate the first pe...

Hi Martin, OK, that was obviously just a misunderstanding. Our periods are all like Jan-03, Jun-07, Aug-11, Oct-12, etc. - a 3-letter month, then hyphen, then 2-digit year. I'll modify the feeder so that it ignores any period starting with "Jun" (which is essentially what you thought you w...

Hi Martin, That appears to have done the trick. I'll get Finance to verify that the numbers look right, but it's certainly display what they expect for the "retained earnings" account where the business unit has stopped having txns posted to it. Now, help me understand correctly what's goi...

Hi Martin, Thanks for the quick response. This is the only feeder I can see that relates to the "retained earnings" account: 'NPAT', '$'] => DB('ECA_GL',!Scenario,!Period,!Company,!BU,'9510','$'); I think I understand the general concept of feeders. Essentially, if TM1 determines that if p...

Hi all, I need some help with, firstly, understanding an issue that has been raised by our Finance team, and secondly, putting a resolution in place. Forgive my ignorance in some of the finer accounting points of this topic - I'm in IT, not Finance. Similarly, I have had some past experience with Mi...