Hi all,
I'm working with a client who's in the process of upgrading from AX2012 to D365 - that have a large amount of fixed assets, and one of the things we've noticed is how much slower the depreciation process runs in D365 vs AX2012.
One of the things we noticed about the difference between the two systems is the amount of journals and batch tasks created when kicking off a monthly job.
In AX, the system appeared to create batch tasks for every 6k assets, regardless of how many of those assets were in "Open" state. This means that a many individual batch tasks had less assets per task and created more tasks that could run in parallel.
In D365, the amount of fixed assets in a journal is controlled by a fixed asset parameter "Summarized depreciation proposal" that defines how many journal lines should be created before creating a new batch task. The default on this is 6,000, and cannot be reduced any lower. This means the ranges are defined by finding 6k open assets, not 6k assets total.
Compared to AX2012, this causes significantly fewer, larger batch tasks to be created that include a larger amount of assets and range of assets.
We did find that these larger batch tasks are one of the main causes of our performance issues. When we manually created depreciation batches with smaller asset ranges in the proposal parameters, the performance significantly improved.
Does anyone know why the minimum number of FA's in a summarized journal is set to 6,000? Ideally, we like to create some kind of customization to reduce this number to 2,000, so that the system creates more, smaller batch tasks that we can execute in parallel. Does anyone see any obvious downsides to this?
