Concurrent Managers are taking long time to pick the request- Urgent help

Hi All,
We have upgrade 11.5.10.2 to 12.0.6 with PCP and loading balancing.
Whennever concurrent request is submitted it takes long time to pick the request.
We have the increases proceseses and reduced the sleep time of the standard manager.
Any inputs on this.
Thanks&Regards,
Apps DBA

Hi,
Was this working properly before? If yes, what changes have been done recently?
How many rows you have in the FND_CONCURRENT_PROCESSES and FND_CONCURRENT_REQUESTS tables?
We have the increases proceseses and reduced the sleep time of the standard manager.Did you bounce the CM after doing these changes?
Regards,
Hussein

Similar Messages

Taking very long time to pick the file from internal deliviery channel fold

Hi B2B gurus,
For one of our trading partner we are testing an AS2 connectivity, so we are sending a 850 po's through internal deliviery channel(create a folder in-house), but while placing the 850 in a internal folder, its taking very long time to pick the file form internal folder
Could you please help me to resolve this issue?
regards

Hi Suni,
Have you specified the polling interval in Transport Server configuration? By default polling interval is 60 seconds.
What is the size of the file being picked?
Regards,
Anuj

Query taking long time for EXTRACTING the data more than 24 hours

Hi ,
Query taking long time for EXTRACTING the data more than 24 hours please find the query and explain plan details below even indexes avilable on table's goe's to FULL TABLE SCAN. please suggest me.......
SQL> explain plan for select a.account_id,round(a.account_balance,2) account_balance,
2 nvl(ah.invoice_id,ah.adjustment_id) transaction_id,
to_char(ah.effective_start_date,'DD-MON-YYYY') transaction_date,
to_char(nvl(i.payment_due_date,
to_date('30-12-9999','dd-mm-yyyy')),'DD-MON-YYYY')
due_date, ah.current_balance-ah.previous_balance amount,
decode(ah.invoice_id,null,'A','I') transaction_type
3 4 5 6 7 8 from account a,account_history ah,invoice i_+
where a.account_id=ah.account_id
and a.account_type_id=1000002
and round(a.account_balance,2) > 0
and (ah.invoice_id is not null or ah.adjustment_id is not null)
and ah.CURRENT_BALANCE > ah.previous_balance
and ah.invoice_id=i.invoice_id(+)
AND a.account_balance > 0
order by a.account_id,ah.effective_start_date desc; 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Explained.
SQL> select * from table(dbms_xplan.display);
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 544K| 30M| | 693K (20)|
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 544K| 30M| 75M| 693K (20)|
|* 2 | HASH JOIN | | 544K| 30M| | 689K (20)|
|* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | ACCOUNT | 20080 | 294K| | 6220 (18)|
|* 4 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 131M| 5532M| 5155M| 678K (20)|
|* 5 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| ACCOUNT_HISTORY | 131M| 3646M| | 197K (25)|
| 6 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| INVOICE | 262M| 3758M| | 306K (18)|
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
2 - access("A"."ACCOUNT_ID"="AH"."ACCOUNT_ID")
3 - filter("A"."ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID"=1000002 AND "A"."ACCOUNT_BALANCE">0 AND
ROUND("A"."ACCOUNT_BALANCE",2)>0)
4 - access("AH"."INVOICE_ID"="I"."INVOICE_ID"(+))
5 - filter("AH"."CURRENT_BALANCE">"AH"."PREVIOUS_BALANCE" AND ("AH"."INVOICE_ID"
IS NOT NULL OR "AH"."ADJUSTMENT_ID" IS NOT NULL))
22 rows selected.
Index Details:+_
SQL> select INDEX_OWNER,INDEX_NAME,COLUMN_NAME,TABLE_NAME from dba_ind_columns where
2 table_name in ('INVOICE','ACCOUNT','ACCOUNT_HISTORY') order by 4;
INDEX_OWNER INDEX_NAME COLUMN_NAME TABLE_NAME
OPS$SVM_SRV4 P_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT_NAME ACCOUNT_NAME ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT CUSTOMER_NODE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_ACCOUNT_TYPE ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_INVOICE INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_PREVIOUS_INVOICE PREVIOUS_INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT_NAME_ID ACCOUNT_NAME ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT_NAME_ID ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_LAST_MODIFIED_ACCOUNT LAST_MODIFIED ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_INVOICE_ACCOUNT INVOICE_ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ACCOUNT SEQNR ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_INVOICE INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ADINV INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA CURRENT_BALANCE ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA ADJUSTMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_LMOD LAST_MODIFIED ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ADINV ADJUSTMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_PAYMENT PAYMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ADJUSTMENT ADJUSTMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_APPLIED_DT APPLIED_DATE ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 P_INVOICE INVOICE_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_INVOICE CUSTOMER_INVOICE_STR INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_LAST_MODIFIED_INVOICE LAST_MODIFIED INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_INVOICE_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_INVOICE_ACCOUNT BILL_RUN_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_INVOICE_BILL_RUN BILL_RUN_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_INVOICE_INVOICE_TYPE INVOICE_TYPE_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_INVOICE_CUSTOMER_NODE CUSTOMER_NODE_ID INVOICE
32 rows selected.
Regards,
Bathula
Oracle-DBA

I have some suggestions. But first, you realize that you have some redundant indexes, right? You have an index on account(account_name) and also account(account_name, account_id), and also account_history(invoice_id) and account_history(invoice_id, adjustment_id). No matter, I will suggest some new composite indexes.
Also, you do not need two lines for these conditions:
and round(a.account_balance, 2) > 0
AND a.account_balance > 0
You can just use: and a.account_balance >= 0.005
So the formatted query isselect a.account_id,
       round(a.account_balance, 2) account_balance,
       nvl(ah.invoice_id, ah.adjustment_id) transaction_id,
       to_char(ah.effective_start_date, 'DD-MON-YYYY') transaction_date,
       to_char(nvl(i.payment_due_date, to_date('30-12-9999', 'dd-mm-yyyy')),
               'DD-MON-YYYY') due_date,
       ah.current_balance - ah.previous_balance amount,
       decode(ah.invoice_id, null, 'A', 'I') transaction_type
from account a, account_history ah, invoice i
where a.account_id = ah.account_id
   and a.account_type_id = 1000002
   and (ah.invoice_id is not null or ah.adjustment_id is not null)
   and ah.CURRENT_BALANCE > ah.previous_balance
   and ah.invoice_id = i.invoice_id(+)
   AND a.account_balance >= .005
order by a.account_id, ah.effective_start_date desc;You will probably want to select:
1. From ACCOUNT first (your smaller table), for which you supply a literal on account_type_id. That should limit the accounts retrieved from ACCOUNT_HISTORY
2. From ACCOUNT_HISTORY. We want to limit the records as much as possible on this table because of the outer join.
3. INVOICE we want to access last because it seems to be least restricted, it is the biggest, and it has the outer join condition so it will manufacture rows to match as many rows as come back from account_history.
Try the query above after creating the following composite indexes. The order of the columns is important:create index account_composite_i on account(account_type_id, account_balance, account_id);
create index acct_history_comp_i on account_history(account_id, invoice_id, adjustment_id, current_balance, previous_balance, effective_start_date);
create index invoice_composite_i on invoice(invoice_id, payment_due_date);All the columns used in the where clause will be indexed, in a logical order suited to the needs of the query. Plus each selected column is indexed as well so that we should not need to touch the tables at all to satisfy the query.
Try the query after creating these indexes.
A final suggestion is to try larger sort and hash area sizes and a manual workarea policy.alter session set workarea_size_policy = manual;
alter session set sort_area_size = 2147483647;
alter session set hash_area_size = 2147483647;

Cisco WS-C6513 taking long time to save the configuration

HI,
cisco WS-C6513 taking long time to save the configuration.
Any ideas?
Thank you

Hello,
do you have correct dial plan ? It very depends on the country you live and you have your VoIP operator.
Try to finish your dialing with # - this may speed it up.

VA05 & VA05N - Taking Long time to Give the Output.

Dear All,
VA05 & VA05N - Taking Long time to Give the Output for
Single date & Single Sales Office
if I create Z-Program (VBAK) also taking Long time for Single date & Single Sales Office.
Please Give some idea to Optimization the VA05 & VA05N.
Please Give your Valuable solution.
Thanks,
Durai.V

Dear Lakshmipathi,
In my Previous client (ECC 5.0) VA05N Executing very fast for one month date for all sales office.
They running SAP around 3 years, there data also huge but its giving fast output.
But my current client ECC 5.0, here running SAP around 2.5 years, But here taking Long time to give
the output for singe date & one Sales Office.
But Billing details report VF05N Executing very fast.
Thanks,
Durai.V

Delete statements are taking longer time

Hi All,
I have an issue with delete statement. below are my oracle DB details.
SQL>select * from v$version;
BANNER
Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.1.0.6.0 - 64bit Production
PL/SQL Release 11.1.0.6.0 - Production
CORE 11.1.0.6.0 Production
TNS for Linux: Version 11.1.0.6.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 11.1.0.6.0 - Production
I have a schema in the database which has 120 tables in it. The problem is, when the QA team is deleting the customers from customer table, it is running long time and haven't completed. this customer table have FK relation with other tables and have all the right indexes in place. then i have tried to identified the problem, why it is taking long time, and found that when they are running this delete query at the same time application is also running. the sessions created by application are locked most of the table and at the same time the delete session is also waiting for exclusive lock on those table. I given the same info to QA team and asked to stop the application when they deleting the customers. Then they said, they don't want to stop the application and the delete has to work and they asked for different solution. Here i am not sure, what solution i need to provide them.
Can you please suggest me a approach and Thanks in advance.

Hari wrote:
and at the same time the delete session is also waiting for exclusive lock on those table. The only way the delete session could be waiting for an exclusive lock on the table is if the code to delete from the customer includes the command: lock table customer in exclusive mode;Unless your original description is wrong, either the deletion code has to change or the application has to stop modifying the customer table.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
Author: <b><em>Oracle Core</em></b>

Transports are taking longer time in Production compared to Quality in BI

Hi All
Could anyone please help me to solve this issue.
In my BI systems , transports which are moving to production are usually taking much longer time usually double the time than Quality.
Please help me to solve this...
Regards
Bala

Hi Bala,
What is your OS and DB ?R3 trans version also depends on OS and DB. According to the note, its kernel version 107 but your system is already on 150.
Depends on your OS and DB you can download the latest R3trand and tp and put it in the kernel. However, if your QA system works good with same R3trans and tp version, I would first suggest adding the parameter STMS --> system overview --> parameter (As per note 1127194 ) column before putting r3trans and tp.
2). Did you check, how often your DB stats are running ? please update on this.
3). Is your tablespace or DB has sufficient space ? please update on this.
Thanks,
Arjun

Transports are taking longer time in Production compared to Quality in BI s

Hi All
Could anyone please help me to solve this issue.
In my BI systems , transports which are moving to production are usually taking much longer time usually double the time than Quality.
Please help me to solve this...
Regards
Bala

Hi Bala,
What is your OS and DB ?R3 trans version also depends on OS and DB. According to the note, its kernel version 107 but your system is already on 150.
Depends on your OS and DB you can download the latest R3trand and tp and put it in the kernel. However, if your QA system works good with same R3trans and tp version, I would first suggest adding the parameter STMS --> system overview --> parameter (As per note 1127194 ) column before putting r3trans and tp.
2). Did you check, how often your DB stats are running ? please update on this.
3). Is your tablespace or DB has sufficient space ? please update on this.
Thanks,
Arjun

Oracle 10 gr studio taking long time to open the home/login page

Hi,
Oracle 10g studio taking the long time to open the home/ login page; when clicked on the launch workspace option.
Thanks,
Brijesh Kumar Singh.

How much memory do you have in your machine?
Are you running VMWare? How much physical (not logical) memory do you have allocated.
What else do you have concurrently running on your machine?
Dan

Table valueset taking long time to open the LOV

Hi,
We added a table valueset to a concurrent program. The table vaueset showsTransaction number from ra_interface_lines_all table. It is having long list. So we added the partial string entering message before open a long list.But still it is taking long time.
Please any help on this highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Samba

Hi
Try to modify the query or creating an index will speed up the process.
Thanks & regards
Rajan

Taking long time in displaying the messages in SXMB_MONI

Dear All,
When I go to SXMB_MONI to display messages, it takes very long time in displaying the messgaes.
And when i double clicks on any message to see its details then also it takes very long in opening the details. During this period server also becomes so much slow that it becomes very difficult to even open any other screen on the server and it looks as server has got hanged up. But after a long wait once the messages are displayed in SXMB_MONI then the server behaves normally.
Kindly suggest what might be the error.
Regards,
NJ

Hi,
Please check in tcode SM50, if there are any archiving, deletion jobs are scheduled or check in SXMB_ADMIN-->Persistence layer analysis if the level is too high, schedule the switch delete procedure.Also check in ST06 what is the Utilization %.
Thanks!

Query taking long time To Fectch the Results

Hi!
when I run the query,it takes too long time for fetching the resultsets.
Please find the query below for the same.
SELECT
A.BUSINESS_UNIT,
A.JOURNAL_ID,
TO_CHAR(A.JOURNAL_DATE,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
A.UNPOST_SEQ,
A.FISCAL_YEAR,
A.ACCOUNTING_PERIOD,
A.JRNL_HDR_STATUS,
C.INVOICE,
C.ACCT_ENTRY_TYPE,
C.LINE_DST_SEQ_NUM,
C.TAX_AUTHORITY_CD,
C.ACCOUNT,
C.MONETARY_AMOUNT,
D.BILL_SOURCE_ID,
D.IDENTIFIER,
D.VAT_AMT_BSE,
D.VAT_TRANS_AMT_BSE,
D.VAT_TXN_TYPE_CD,
D.TAX_CD_VAT,
D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT,
D.VAT_APPLICABILITY,
E.BILL_TO_CUST_ID,
E.BILL_STATUS,
E.BILL_CYCLE_ID,
TO_CHAR(E.INVOICE_DT,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
TO_CHAR(E.ACCOUNTING_DT,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
TO_CHAR(E.DT_INVOICED,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
E.ENTRY_TYPE,
E.ENTRY_REASON,
E.AR_LVL,
E.AR_DST_OPT,
E.AR_ENTRY_CREATED,
E.GEN_AR_ITEM_FLG,
E.GL_LVL, E.GL_ENTRY_CREATED,
(Case when c.account in ('30120000','30180050','30190000','30290000','30490000',
'30690000','30900040','30990000','35100000','35120000','35150000','35160000',
'39100050','90100000')
and D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT <> 0 then 'Ej_Momskonto_med_moms'
When c.account not in ('30120000','30180050','30190000','30290000',
'30490000','30690000','30900040','30990000','35100000','35120000','35150000',
'35160000','39100050','90100000')
and D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT <> 25 then 'Momskonto_utan_moms' end)
FROM
sysadm.PS_JRNL_HEADER A,
sysadm.PS_JRNL_LN B,
sysadm.PS_BI_ACCT_ENTRY C,
sysadm.PS_BI_LINE D,
sysadm.PS_BI_HDR E
WHERE A.BUSINESS_UNIT = '&BU'
AND A.JOURNAL_DATE BETWEEN TO_DATE('&From_date','YYYY-MM-DD')
AND TO_DATE('&To_date','YYYY-MM-DD')
AND A.SOURCE      = 'BI'
AND A.BUSINESS_UNIT = B.BUSINESS_UNIT
AND A.JOURNAL_ID      = B.JOURNAL_ID
AND A.JOURNAL_DATE = B.JOURNAL_DATE
AND A.UNPOST_SEQ      = B.UNPOST_SEQ
AND B.BUSINESS_UNIT = C.BUSINESS_UNIT
AND B.JOURNAL_ID = C.JOURNAL_ID
AND B.JOURNAL_DATE = C.JOURNAL_DATE
AND B.JOURNAL_LINE = C.JOURNAL_LINE
AND C.ACCT_ENTRY_TYPE = 'RR'
AND C.BUSINESS_UNIT = '&BU'
AND C.BUSINESS_UNIT = D.BUSINESS_UNIT
AND C.INVOICE = D.INVOICE
AND C.LINE_SEQ_NUM = D.LINE_SEQ_NUM
AND D.BUSINESS_UNIT = '&BU'
AND D.BUSINESS_UNIT = E.BUSINESS_UNIT
AND D.INVOICE = E.INVOICE
AND E.BUSINESS_UNIT = '&BU'
AND
((c.account in ('30120000','30180050','30190000','30290000','30490000',
'30690000','30900040','30990000','35100000','35120000','35150000','35160000',
'39100050','90100000')
and D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT <> 0)
OR
(c.account not in ('30120000','30180050','30190000','30290000','30490000',
'30690000','30900040','30990000','35100000','35120000','35150000','35160000',
'39100050','z')
and D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT <> 25)
GROUP BY
A.BUSINESS_UNIT,
A.JOURNAL_ID,
TO_CHAR(A.JOURNAL_DATE,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
A.UNPOST_SEQ, A.FISCAL_YEAR,
A.ACCOUNTING_PERIOD,
A.JRNL_HDR_STATUS,
C.INVOICE,
C.ACCT_ENTRY_TYPE,
C.LINE_DST_SEQ_NUM,
C.TAX_AUTHORITY_CD,
C.ACCOUNT,
D.BILL_SOURCE_ID,
D.IDENTIFIER,
D.VAT_TXN_TYPE_CD,
D.TAX_CD_VAT,
D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT,
D.VAT_APPLICABILITY,
E.BILL_TO_CUST_ID,
E.BILL_STATUS,
E.BILL_CYCLE_ID,
TO_CHAR(E.INVOICE_DT,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
TO_CHAR(E.ACCOUNTING_DT,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
TO_CHAR(E.DT_INVOICED,'YYYY-MM-DD'),
E.ENTRY_TYPE, E.ENTRY_REASON,
E.AR_LVL, E.AR_DST_OPT,
E.AR_ENTRY_CREATED,
E.GEN_AR_ITEM_FLG,
E.GL_LVL,
E.GL_ENTRY_CREATED,
C.MONETARY_AMOUNT,
D.VAT_AMT_BSE,
D.VAT_TRANS_AMT_BSE
having
(Case when c.account in ('30120000','30180050','30190000','30290000',
'30490000','30690000','30900040','30990000','35100000','35120000','35150000',
'35160000','39100050','90100000')
and D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT <> 0 then 'Ej_Momskonto_med_moms'
When c.account not in ('30120000','30180050','30190000','30290000','30490000',
'30690000','30900040','30990000','35100000','35120000','35150000','35160000',
'39100050','90100000')
and D.TAX_CD_VAT_PCT <> 25 then 'Momskonto_utan_moms' end) is not null
So Could you provide the solution to fix this issue?
Thanks
senthil

[url http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=501834&tstart=0]When your query takes too long ...
Regards,
Rob.

Taking longer time while exchanging the partitions

Hi,
There are 60 partitions in my table and I am trying to parallely exchange the data into different partitions. Each exchange partition is taking more than 5 minutes and some times it even took 45 minutes for single exchange partition. The volume of data for each partition is not more than 1k records.
The tables doesn't have any indexes and I am exchanging without validation clause. Then why does it take so long for exchanging the partition?
Does oracle hold any kind of locks while exchanging the partition? Version I am using is Oracle 10g R2.
Please help me in resolving this.
Thanks,
Swetha

Hi,
The stmt I am using is "ALTER TABLE ad_cookie_page_stats EXCHANGE PARTITION FINANCE_US_20100803 WITH TABLE ad_cookie_page_125 WITHOUT VALIDATION"
There are no Pk/UK keys on the tables and below provided are the schema definitions of both the tables.
SQL> desc ad_cookie_page_stats;
Name Null? Type
DATE_KEY NUMBER
PROPERTY_KEY NUMBER
PAGE_KEY NUMBER
GENDER_KEY NUMBER
AGE_BRACKET_KEY NUMBER
SUBSESSION_REFERRER VARCHAR2(500)
SUBSESSION_REFERRER_GROUP_KEY NUMBER
SUBSESSION_REFERRER_QUERY_TERM VARCHAR2(500)
COOKIED_CLICKS NUMBER
COOKIED_VIEWS NUMBER
BCOOKIE VARCHAR2(200)
YUID VARCHAR2(200)
TIMESPENT NUMBER
SESSION_ID NUMBER
REFERRALS NUMBER
ULT_REFERRALS NUMBER
NON_ULT_REFERRALS NUMBER
DIRECT_HITS NUMBER
desc ad_cookie_page_125;Name Null? Type
DATE_KEY NUMBER
PROPERTY_KEY NUMBER
PAGE_KEY NUMBER
GENDER_KEY NUMBER
AGE_BRACKET_KEY NUMBER
SUBSESSION_REFERRER VARCHAR2(500)
SUBSESSION_REFERRER_GROUP_KEY NUMBER
SUBSESSION_REFERRER_QUERY_TERM VARCHAR2(500)
COOKIED_CLICKS NUMBER
COOKIED_VIEWS NUMBER
BCOOKIE VARCHAR2(200)
YUID VARCHAR2(200)
TIMESPENT NUMBER
SESSION_ID NUMBER
REFERRALS NUMBER
ULT_REFERRALS NUMBER
NON_ULT_REFERRALS NUMBER
DIRECT_HITS NUMBER

Taking long time to get the data while trying to drill down the freechar's

hi experts,
i have a query on 0sd_c03, in this query PLANT and SALES ORG. are in free characteristics, whenever i am trying to drill down the plant or sales organization it is taking lot of time to retrieve the data.
what is the problem,
give me suggestions to solve this problem.
thanks in advance,
venkat

From RSA1 double click on the infoobjects. Goto Business Explorer tab
For the option Query Execution Filter Val. Selection select Only posted values for navigation
Try whether thsi setting solves your problem

Taking long time to load the data

Hi All,
When my BI colleague is trying to load data from a source system, it is taking too long.
And the corresponding job BI_BOOK* is taking around 90000 seconds already.
Can anyone suggest how to tackle this problem?
Thanks so much in advance.
Best Regards, Pradeep

Hi
If your Flat File Source System Takes, time there is no other go than Make the Request Red and Delete the same.Repeat the Upload.
Make sure that your Flat file is closed while upload,
If Infopackage loads data from a flat file on your workstation, then you cannot execute the Infopackage in a Process Chain you need to put your flat file on the Application Server(AL11) and change your Infopackage to load from there instead of the workstation
The file should be closed while scheduling
The file path mentioned in the external data tabpage of the infopackage should be correct
Records in the file should be in uppercase you can use lowercase for a particular characteristic.provided the lowercase checkbox in the general tabpage of the maintenance screen of the infoobject is checked.
Calendar day should be of the format yyyymmdd in the file
Hope ithelps
Edited by: Aduri on Jan 30, 2009 11:19 AM

Concurrent Managers are taking long time to pick the request- Urgent help

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for