Definition
Finite vs infinite scheduling describes the two competing assumptions about resource capacity that any production planning system must choose between. Infinite-capacity scheduling allows any work center to absorb any volume of work; finite-capacity scheduling refuses to overload a resource and places operations only where capacity genuinely exists. The choice determines whether the published schedule reflects what the floor can actually run.
Why it matters
Most ERPs default to infinite-capacity scheduling, which silently overloads bottlenecks and produces optimistic promise dates the floor cannot meet. Shops that move to finite-capacity scheduling routinely see on-time delivery rise 15–25 percentage points without buying new machines, because the schedule stops asking the floor to do impossible work.
Common failure mode
A planner releases 80 hours of work to a 40-hour work center. Infinite-capacity logic accepts it. The bottleneck silently doubles in load, operators self-prioritize by gut, and Friday becomes a firefight. The schedule prints clean while the floor runs in chaos.
How Skody approaches it
Skody uses a strict finite-capacity model that includes machines, labor, tooling, pallets, and outside processing. Operations that cannot fit surface as at-risk jobs with the named constraint, so planners can act before the shortfall reaches the floor.
Related terms
Questions
See finite vs infinite scheduling in your shop
Run the Production Clarity diagnostic and see which scheduling constraints are costing you OTD today.
Take the Diagnostic