Philosophy xCluster 1...
Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:29 pm
Hi there,
today a customer approached me with a question dealing with a challenge we can't resolve within planMutiWeeks. I just want to let you know something about the xCluster 1 philosophy which is subject to be improved in xCluster 2. Here's the rough scenario:
Now the result of the customers call assigns the MultiWeeksOrder to week 8 which is a violation of the constraints.
What I learned today is:
We return a result even if it is violating the constraint.
So if we compare this approach to xTour (orders remain unscheduled) this is therefore different.
Keep this in mind!
Best regards,
Bernd
today a customer approached me with a question dealing with a challenge we can't resolve within planMutiWeeks. I just want to let you know something about the xCluster 1 philosophy which is subject to be improved in xCluster 2. Here's the rough scenario:
- 1. planMultiWeeks with a scope of 8 weeks
- 2. the resource isn't available in week 8 (week weights for week 8 is [...},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0})
- 3. specific MultiWeeksOrder with rhythm = 8, visitsPerWeek = 1
- 4. firstWeek == lastWeek == 8
Now the result of the customers call assigns the MultiWeeksOrder to week 8 which is a violation of the constraints.
What I learned today is:
We return a result even if it is violating the constraint.
So if we compare this approach to xTour (orders remain unscheduled) this is therefore different.
Keep this in mind!
Best regards,
Bernd