Cost center query tkakes a long time while executing with User's Id

Hi Experts,
We have a cost-center query which is taking a long time to display the output with User's id.
I tried running the report with the same selections and was able to get the values within seconds.
Also we have maintained aggregates on the cube.
When user tries it for a single cost-center the performance is Ok.
Any help on this wil be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Amit

Hi,
while running the query find the trace in ST05 - before running the query in RSRT activate the trace with user id and after seeing the report in RSRT deactivate the trace.
go through the logs find the which object taking long time then create the aggregates on the cube.
while creating agggates give the fixed value.
please find the doc " how to find the SQL traces in sap bi"
Thanks,
Phani.

Similar Messages

  • Query is taking long time to execute after migrating to 10g r2

    Hi
    We recently migrated the database from 9i to 10gr2 ((10.2.0.2.0).. This query was running in acceptable time before the upgrade in 9i.. Now it is taking a long long time to execute this... Can you please let me know what should i do to improve the performance now.. We are running stats everyday..
    Thanks for your help,
    Shree
    ======================================================================================
    SELECT cr.cash_receipt_id
    ,cr.pay_from_customer
    ,cr.receipt_number
    ,cr.receipt_date
    ,cr.amount
    ,cust.account_number
    ,crh.gl_date
    ,cr.set_of_books_id
    ,sum(ra.amount_applied) amount_applied
    FROM AR_CASH_RECEIPTS_ALL cr
    ,AR_RECEIVABLE_APPLICATIONS_ALL ra
    ,hz_cust_accounts cust
    ,AR_CASH_RECEIPT_HISTORY_ALL crh
    ,GL_PERIOD_STATUSES gps
    ,FND_APPLICATION app
    WHERE cr.cash_receipt_id = ra.cash_receipt_id
    AND ra.status = 'UNAPP'
    AND cr.status <> 'REV'
    AND cust.cust_account_id = cr.pay_from_customer
    AND substr(cust.account_number,1,2) <> 'SI' -- Don't allocate Unapplied receipts FOR SI customers
    AND crh.cash_receipt_id = cr.cash_receipt_id
    AND app.application_id = gps.application_id
    AND app.application_short_name = 'AR'
    AND gps.period_name = 'May-07'
    AND crh.gl_date <= gps.end_date
    AND cr.receipt_number not like 'WH%'
    -- AND cust.customer_number = '0000079260001'
    GROUP BY cr.cash_receipt_id
    ,cr.pay_from_customer
    ,cr.receipt_number
    ,cr.receipt_date
    ,cr.amount
    ,cust.account_number
    ,crh.gl_date
    ,cr.set_of_books_id
    HAVING sum(ra.amount_applied) > 0;
    =========================================================================================
    Here is the explain plan in 10g r2 (10.2.0.2.0)
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    Plan hash value: 2617075047
    | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)|
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 92340 | 10M| | 513K (1)|
    |* 1 | FILTER | | | | | |
    | 2 | HASH GROUP BY | | 92340 | 10M| 35M| 513K (1)|
    | 3 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | AR_RECEIVABLE_APPLICATIONS_ALL | 2 | 34 |
    | 4 | NESTED LOOPS | | 184K| 21M| | 510K (1)|
    |* 5 | HASH JOIN | | 99281 | 9M| 3296K| 176K (1)|
    |* 6 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | HZ_CUST_ACCOUNTS | 112K| 1976K| | 22563 (1)|
    |* 7 | HASH JOIN | | 412K| 33M| 25M| 151K (1)|
    | 8 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | AR_CASH_RECEIPT_HISTORY_ALL | 332K| 4546K|
    | 9 | NESTED LOOPS | | 498K| 19M| | 26891 (1)|
    | 10 | NESTED LOOPS | | 2 | 54 | | 4 (0)|
    | 11 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| FND_APPLICATION | 1 | 8 | | 1 (0)|
    |* 12 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | FND_APPLICATION_U3 | 1 | | | 0 (0)|
    | 13 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| GL_PERIOD_STATUSES | 2 | 38 | | 3 (0)
    |* 14 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | GL_PERIOD_STATUSES_U1 | 1 | | | 2 (0)|
    |* 15 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | AR_CASH_RECEIPT_HISTORY_N2 | 332K| | | 1011 (1)
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    |* 16 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | AR_CASH_RECEIPTS_ALL | 5492K| 235M| | 108K
    |* 17 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | AR_RECEIVABLE_APPLICATIONS_N1 | 4 | | | 2
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
    1 - filter(SUM("RA"."AMOUNT_APPLIED")>0)
    5 - access("CUST"."CUST_ACCOUNT_ID"="CR"."PAY_FROM_CUSTOMER")
    6 - filter(SUBSTR("CUST"."ACCOUNT_NUMBER",1,2)<>'SI')
    7 - access("CRH"."CASH_RECEIPT_ID"="CR"."CASH_RECEIPT_ID")
    12 - access("APP"."APPLICATION_SHORT_NAME"='AR')
    14 - access("APP"."APPLICATION_ID"="GPS"."APPLICATION_ID" AND "GPS"."PERIOD_NAME"='May-07')
    filter("GPS"."PERIOD_NAME"='May-07')
    15 - access("CRH"."GL_DATE"<="GPS"."END_DATE")
    16 - filter("CR"."STATUS"<>'REV' AND "CR"."RECEIPT_NUMBER" NOT LIKE 'WH%')
    17 - access("CR"."CASH_RECEIPT_ID"="RA"."CASH_RECEIPT_ID" AND "RA"."STATUS"='UNAPP')
    filter("RA"."CASH_RECEIPT_ID" IS NOT NULL)
    Here is the explain plan in 9i
    Execution Plan
    0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=445977 Card=78530 By
    tes=9423600)
    1 0 FILTER
    2 1 SORT (GROUP BY) (Cost=445977 Card=78530 Bytes=9423600)
    3 2 HASH JOIN (Cost=443717 Card=157060 Bytes=18847200)
    4 3 HASH JOIN (Cost=99563 Card=94747 Bytes=9758941)
    5 4 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HZ_CUST_ACCOUNTS' (Cost=12
    286 Card=110061 Bytes=1981098)
    6 4 HASH JOIN (Cost=86232 Card=674761 Bytes=57354685)
    7 6 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'AR_CASH_RECEIP
    T_HISTORY_ALL' (Cost=17532 Card=542304 Bytes=7592256)
    8 7 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=17536 Card=809791 Bytes=332
    01431)
    9 8 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=4 Card=1 Bytes=27)
    10 9 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'FND_APPL
    ICATION' (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=8)
    11 10 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'FND_APPLICATION_
    U3' (UNIQUE)
    12 9 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'GL_PERIO
    D_STATUSES' (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=19)
    13 12 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'GL_PERIOD_STATUSE
    S_U1' (UNIQUE) (Cost=2 Card=1)
    14 8 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'AR_CASH_RECEIPT_HISTO
    RY_N2' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1740 Card=542304)
    15 6 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'AR_CASH_RECEIPTS_ALL' (C
    ost=60412 Card=8969141 Bytes=394642204)
    16 3 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'AR_RECEIVABLE_APPLICATIONS_A
    LL' (Cost=337109 Card=15613237 Bytes=265425029)

    Hi,
    The plan between 9i and 10g is pretty the same but the amount of data fetched has considerably increased. I guess the query was performing slow even in 9i.
    The AR_CASH_RECEIPT_HISTORY_ALL is presently having 332000 rows in 10g where as it was 17532 in 9i.
    AR_CASH_RECEIPT_HISTORY_N2 is now having 332,000 rows in 10g where as in 9i it had 1,740
    Try creating some indexes on
    AR_CASH_RECEIPTS_ALL
    hz_cust_accounts

  • Query takes a long time on EBAN table

    Hi,
    I am trying to execute a simple select statement on EBAN table. This query takes unexpectionally longer time to execute.
    Query is :
    SELECT banfn bnfpo ernam badat ebeln ebelp
          INTO TABLE gt_eban
          FROM eban FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_ekko_ekpo
          WHERE
          banfn IN s_banfn AND
          ernam IN s_ernam
          and ebeln = gt_ekko_ekpo-ebeln AND
          ebelp = gt_ekko_ekpo-ebelp.
    Structure of gt_ekko_ekpo
    TYPES : BEGIN OF ty_ekko_ekpo,
            ebeln TYPE ekko-ebeln,
            ebelp TYPE ekpo-ebelp,
            bukrs TYPE ekko-bukrs,
            aedat TYPE ekko-aedat,
            lifnr TYPE ekko-lifnr,
            ekorg TYPE ekko-ekorg,
            ekgrp TYPE ekko-ekgrp,
            waers TYPE ekko-waers,
            bedat TYPE ekko-bedat,
            otb_value TYPE ekko-otb_value,
            otb_res_value TYPE ekko-otb_res_value,
            matnr TYPE ekpo-matnr,
            werks TYPE ekpo-werks,
            matkl TYPE ekpo-matkl,
            elikz TYPE ekpo-elikz,
            wepos TYPE ekpo-wepos,
            emlif TYPE ekpo-emlif,
      END OF ty_ekko_ekpo.
    Structure of GT_EBAN
    TYPES : BEGIN OF ty_eban,
      banfn TYPE eban-banfn,
      bnfpo TYPE eban-bnfpo,
      ernam TYPE eban-ernam,
      badat TYPE eban-badat,
      ebeln TYPE eban-ebeln,
      ebelp TYPE eban-ebelp,
      END OF ty_eban.
    Query seems to be OK to me. But still am not able to figure out the reason for this performance issue.
    Please provide your inputs.
    Thanks.
    Richa

    Hi Richa,
    Maybe you are executing the query with S_BANFN empty. Still based on the note 191492 you should change your query on like the following
    1st Suggestion:
    if gt_ekko_ekpo[] is not initial.
    SELECT banfn banfpo       INTO TABLE gt_eket
          FROM eket FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_ekko_ekpo
          WHERE
         ebeln = gt_ekko_ekpo-ebeln AND
          ebelp = gt_ekko_ekpo-ebelp.
    if sy-subrc = 0.
    delete gt_eket where banfn not in s_banfn.
    if gt_eket[] is not initial
    SELECT banfn bnfpo ernam badat ebeln ebelp
          INTO TABLE gt_eban
          FROM eban FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_eket
          WHERE
          banfn = gt_eket-banfn
         and  banfpo = gt_eket-banfpo.
    if sy-subrc = 0.
      delete gt_eban where ernam not in s_ernam.
    endif.
    endif.
    endif.
    endif.
    2nd Suggestion:
    if gt_ekko_ekpo[] is not initial.
    SELECT banfn banfpo       INTO TABLE gt_eket
          FROM eket FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_ekko_ekpo
          WHERE
         ebeln = gt_ekko_ekpo-ebeln AND
          ebelp = gt_ekko_ekpo-ebelp.
    if sy-subrc = 0.
    delete gt_eket where banfn not in s_banfn.
    if gt_eket[] is not initial
    SELECT banfn bnfpo ernam badat ebeln ebelp
          INTO TABLE gt_eban
          FROM eban FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_eket
          WHERE
          banfn = gt_eket-banfn
         and  banfpo = gt_eket-banfpo
         and ernam in s_ernam.
    endif.
    endif.
    endif.
    Hope this helps.
    Regards,
    R

  • Taking long time to execute views

    Hi All,
    my query is taking long time to execute(i am using standard views in my query)
    XLA_INV_AEL_GL_V , XLA_WIP_AEL_GL_V -----these standard views itself taking long time to execute ,but i need the info from this views
    WHERE gjh.je_batch_id = gjb.je_batch_id AND
    gjh.je_header_id = gjl.je_header_id AND
    gjh.je_header_id = xlawip.je_header_id AND
    gjl.je_header_id = xlawip.je_header_id AND
    gjl.je_line_num = xlawip.je_line_num AND
    gcc.code_combination_id = gjl.code_combination_id AND
    gjl.code_combination_id = xlawip.code_combination_id AND
    gjb.set_of_books_id = xlawip.set_of_books_id AND
    gjh.je_source = 'Inventory' AND
    gjh.je_category = 'WIP' AND
    gp.period_set_name = 'Accounting' AND
    gp.period_name = gjl.period_name AND
    gp.period_name = gjh.period_name AND
    gp.start_date +1 between to_date(startdate,'DD-MON-YY') AND
    to_date(enddate,'DD-MON-YY') AND
    gjh.status =nvl(lstatus,gjh.status)
    Could any one help me to execute it fast?
    Thanks
    Madhu

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

  • Simple query is taking long time

    Hi Experts,
    The below query is taking long time.
    [code]SELECT   FS.*
      FROM   ORL.FAX_STAGE FS
             INNER JOIN
                   ORL.FAX_SOURCE FSRC
                INNER JOIN
                   GLOBAL_BU_MAPPING GBM
                ON GBM.BU_ID = FSRC.BUID
             ON UPPER (FSRC.FAX_NUMBER) = UPPER (FS.DESTINATION)
    WHERE       FSRC.IS_DELETED = 'N'
             AND GBM.BU_ID IS NOT NULL
             AND UPPER (FS.FAX_STATUS) ='COMPLETED';[/code]
    this query is returning 1645457 records.
    [code]PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    | Id  | Operation           | Name                   | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT    |                        |   625K|   341M| 45113   (1)|
    |   1 |  HASH JOIN          |                        |   625K|   341M| 45113   (1)|
    |   2 |   NESTED LOOPS      |                        |   611 | 14664 |    22   (0)|
    |   3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL| FAX_SOURCE             |  2290 | 48090 |    22   (0)|
    |   4 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN | GLOBAL_BU_MAPPING_BUID |     1 |     3 |     0   (0)|
    |   5 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL | FAX_STAGE              |  2324K|  1214M| 45076   (1)|
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    Note
       - 'PLAN_TABLE' is old version
    15 rows selected.[/code]
    The distinct number of records in each table.
    [code]SELECT FAX_STATUS,count(*)
    FROM fax_STAGE
    GROUP BY FAX_STATUS;
    FAX_STATUS    COUNT(*)
    BROKEN          10
    Broken - New    9
    Completed    2324493
    New             20
    SELECT is_deleted,COUNT(*)
    FROM  FAX_SOURCE
    GROUP BY IS_DELETED;
    IS_DELETED COUNT(*)
    N         2290
    Y         78[/code]
    Total number of records in each table.
    [code]SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ORL.FAX_SOURCE FSRC-- 2368
    SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ORL.FAX_STAGE--2324532
    SELECT COUNT(*) FROM APPS_GLOBAL.GLOBAL_BU_MAPPING--9
    [/code]
    To improve the performance of this query I have created the following indexes.
    [code]Functional based index on UPPER (FSRC.FAX_NUMBER) ,UPPER (FS.DESTINATION) and UPPER (FS.FAX_STATUS).
    Bitmap index on FSRC.IS_DELETED.
    Normal Index on GBM.BU_ID and FSRC.BUID.
    [/code]
    But still the performance is bad for this query.
    What can I do apart from this to improve the performance of this query.
    Please help me .
    Thanks in advance.

    <I have created the following indexes.
    CREATE INDEX ORL.IDX_DESTINATION_RAM ON ORL.FAX_STAGE(UPPER("DESTINATION"))
    CREATE INDEX ORL.IDX_FAX_STATUS_RAM ON ORL.FAX_STAGE(LOWER("FAX_STATUS"))
    CREATE INDEX ORL.IDX_UPPER_FAX_STATUS_RAM ON ORL.FAX_STAGE(UPPER("FAX_STATUS"))
    CREATE INDEX ORL.IDX_BUID_RAM ON ORL.FAX_SOURCE(BUID)
    CREATE INDEX ORL.IDX_FAX_NUMBER_RAM ON ORL.FAX_SOURCE(UPPER("FAX_NUMBER"))
    CREATE BITMAP INDEX ORL.IDX_IS_DELETED_RAM ON ORL.FAX_SOURCE(IS_DELETED)
    After creating the following indexes performance got improved.
    But our DBA said that new BITMAP index at FAX_SOURCE table (ORL.IDX_IS_DELETED_RAM) can cause locks
    on multiple rows if IS_DELETED column is in use. Please proceed with detailed tests.
    I am sending the explain plan before creating indexes and after indexes has been created.
    SELECT  FS.*
    FROM  ORL.FAX_STAGE FS
                    INNER JOIN
                    ORL.FAX_SOURCE FSRC
                  INNER JOIN
                      GLOBAL_BU_MAPPING GBM
                    ON GBM.BU_ID = FSRC.BUID
                ON UPPER (FSRC.FAX_NUMBER) = UPPER (FS.DESTINATION)
    WHERE      FSRC.IS_DELETED = 'N'
              AND GBM.BU_ID IS NOT NULL
              AND UPPER (FS.FAX_STATUS) =:B1;
    --OLD without indexes
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    Plan hash value: 3076973749
    | Id  | Operation          | Name                  | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time    |
    |  0 | SELECT STATEMENT    |                        |  141K|    85M| 45130  (1)| 00:09:02 |
    |*  1 |  HASH JOIN          |                        |  141K|    85M| 45130  (1)| 00:09:02 |
    |  2 |  NESTED LOOPS      |                        |  611 | 18330 |    22  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL| FAX_SOURCE            |  2290 | 59540 |    22  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  4 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN | GLOBAL_BU_MAPPING_BUID |    1 |    4 |    0  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  5 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL | FAX_STAGE              | 23245 |    13M| 45106  (1)| 00:09:02 |
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
      1 - access(UPPER("FSRC"."FAX_NUMBER")=UPPER("FS"."DESTINATION"))
      3 - filter("FSRC"."IS_DELETED"='N')
      4 - access("GBM"."BU_ID"="FSRC"."BUID")
          filter("GBM"."BU_ID" IS NOT NULL)
      5 - filter(UPPER("FS"."FAX_STATUS")=SYS_OP_C2C(:B1))
    21 rows selected.
    --NEW with indexes.
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    Plan hash value: 665032407
    | Id  | Operation                        | Name                    | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time    |
    |  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                |                          |  5995 |  3986K|  3117  (1)| 00:00:38 |
    |*  1 |  HASH JOIN                      |                          |  5995 |  3986K|  3117  (1)| 00:00:38 |
    |  2 |  NESTED LOOPS                  |                          |  611 | 47658 |    20  (5)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  3 |    VIEW                          | index$_join$_002        |  2290 |  165K|    20  (5)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  4 |    HASH JOIN                    |                          |      |      |            |      |
    |*  5 |      HASH JOIN                  |                          |      |      |            |      |
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    |  6 |      BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS|                          |  2290 |  165K|    1  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  7 |        BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE | IDX_IS_DELETED_RAM      |      |      |            |      |
    |  8 |      INDEX FAST FULL SCAN      | IDX_BUID_RAM            |  2290 |  165K|    8  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |  9 |      INDEX FAST FULL SCAN        | IDX_FAX_NUMBER_RAM      |  2290 |  165K|    14  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |* 10 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN              | GLOBAL_BU_MAPPING_BUID  |    1 |    4 |    0  (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |  11 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID    | FAX_STAGE                | 23245 |    13M|  3096  (1)| 00:00:38 |
    |* 12 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN              | IDX_UPPER_FAX_STATUS_RAM |  9298 |      |  2434  (1)| 00:00:30 |
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
      1 - access(UPPER("DESTINATION")="FSRC"."SYS_NC00035$")
      3 - filter("FSRC"."IS_DELETED"='N')
      4 - access(ROWID=ROWID)
      5 - access(ROWID=ROWID)
      7 - access("FSRC"."IS_DELETED"='N')
      10 - access("GBM"."BU_ID"="FSRC"."BUID")
          filter("GBM"."BU_ID" IS NOT NULL)
      12 - access(UPPER("FAX_STATUS")=SYS_OP_C2C(:B1))
    31 rows selected
    Please confirm on the DBA comment.Is this bitmap index locks rows in my case.
    Thanks.>

  • Query Prediction takes long time - After upgrade DB 9i to 10g

    Hi all, Thanks for all your help.
    we've got an issue in Discoverer, we are using Discoverer10g (10.1.2.2) with APPS and recently we upgraded Oracle DatBase from 9i to 10g.
    After Database upgrade, when we try to run reports in Discoverer plus taking long time for query prediction than used to be(double/triple), only for query prediction taking long time andthen takes for running query.
    Have anyone got this kind of issues seen before, could you share your ideas/thoughts that way i can ask DBA or sysadmin to change any settings at Discoverer server side
    Thanks in advance
    skat

    Hi skat
    Did you also upgrade your Discoverer from 9i to 10g or did you always have 10g?
    If you weren't always on 10g, take a look inside the EUL5_QPP_STATS table by running SELECT COUNT(*) FROM EUL5_QPP_STATS on both the old and new systems
    I suspect you may well find that there are far more records in the old system than the new one. What this table stores is the statistics for the queries that have been run before. Using those statistics is how Discoverer can estimate how long queries will take to run. If you have few statistics then for some time Discoverer will not know how long previous queries will take. Also, the statistics table used by 9i is incompatible with the one used by 10g so you can't just copy them over, just in case you were thinking about it.
    Personally, unless you absolutely rely on it, I would turn the query predictor off. You do this by editing your PREF.TXT (located on the middle tier server at $ORACLE_HOME\Discoverer|util) and change the value of QPPEnable to 0. AFter you have done this you need to run the Applypreferences script located in the same folder and then stop and start your Discoverer service. From that point on queries will no longer try to predict how long they will take and they will just start running.
    There is something else to check. Please run a query and look at the SQL. Do you by change see a database hint called NOREWRITE? If you do then this will also cause poor performance. Should you see this let me know and I will let you know how to override it.
    If you have always been on 10g and you have only upgraded your database it could be that you have not generated your database statistics for the tables that Discoverer is using. You will need to speak with your DBA to see about having the statistics generated. Without statistics, the query predictor will be very, very slow.
    Best wishes
    Michael

  • Add "cost center" query to a start condition?

    Hi there,
    we got a new requirement for one of our plants.
    We're on SRM 5.0 classic scenario.
    Is it possible to add a "cost center" query to a specific start condition (SWB_PROCUREMENT) of a workflow?
    E.g. if a user uses cost center 4711 for a shopping cart item a specific cost center responsible xyz should approve this item.
    If the user uses another cost center 4712 for a second item in this shopping cart this item should be approved by another cost center responsible abc.
    Is that somehow possible ?
    So far I did not find a suitable expression for cost center.
    Thanks in advance for your answers.
    Best regards,
    Henning

    Hi Masa,
    thanks for your answer. Perhaps you also have a hint for the following:
    I can't really find in the metioned thread or in note 731637 what happens if a SC with several items is partially approved.
    Example:
    SC with 3 items:
    item 1 cc 1000
    item 2 cc 2000
    item 3 cc 1000
    Let's say item 1+3 have been approved by the approver found by badi and WS14500015. Is a PO or a purchase requisition created in backend? Or is it only created after the whole SC has been approved (i.e. also item 2).
    Thanks for a hint and best regards,
    Henning

  • Time_out Dump on this query take too long time

    hi experts,
    in my report a query taking too long time
    pl. provide performance tips or suggestions
    select mkpf~mblnr  mkpf~mjahr  mkpf~usnam  mkpf~vgart    
           mkpf~xabln  mkpf~xblnr  mkpf~zshift mkpf~frbnr    
           mkpf~bktxt  mkpf~bldat  mkpf~budat  mkpf~cpudt    
           mkpf~cputm  mseg~anln1  mseg~anln2  mseg~aplzl    
           mseg~aufnr  mseg~aufpl  mseg~bpmng  mseg~bprme    
           mseg~bstme  mseg~bstmg  mseg~bukrs  mseg~bwart    
           mseg~bwtar  mseg~charg  mseg~dmbtr  mseg~ebeln    
           mseg~ebelp  mseg~erfme  mseg~erfmg  mseg~exbwr    
           mseg~exvkw  mseg~grund  mseg~kdauf  mseg~kdein    
           mseg~kdpos  mseg~kostl  mseg~kunnr  mseg~kzbew    
           mseg~kzvbr  mseg~kzzug  mseg~lgort  mseg~lifnr    
           mseg~matnr  mseg~meins  mseg~menge  mseg~lsmng    
           mseg~nplnr  mseg~ps_psp_pnr  mseg~rsnum  mseg~rspos
           mseg~shkzg  mseg~sobkz  mseg~vkwrt  mseg~waers    
           mseg~werks  mseg~xauto  mseg~zeile  mseg~SGTXT    
        into table itab                                      
           from mkpf as mkpf                                 
            inner join mseg as mseg                          
                    on mkpf~MBLNR = mseg~mblnr               
                   and mkpf~mjahr = mseg~mjahr

    no the original query is, i use where clouse with conditions.
    select mkpf~mblnr  mkpf~mjahr  mkpf~usnam  mkpf~vgart
           mkpf~xabln  mkpf~xblnr  mkpf~zshift mkpf~frbnr
           mkpf~bktxt  mkpf~bldat  mkpf~budat  mkpf~cpudt
           mkpf~cputm  mseg~anln1  mseg~anln2  mseg~aplzl
           mseg~aufnr  mseg~aufpl  mseg~bpmng  mseg~bprme
           mseg~bstme  mseg~bstmg  mseg~bukrs  mseg~bwart
           mseg~bwtar  mseg~charg  mseg~dmbtr  mseg~ebeln
           mseg~ebelp  mseg~erfme  mseg~erfmg  mseg~exbwr
           mseg~exvkw  mseg~grund  mseg~kdauf  mseg~kdein
           mseg~kdpos  mseg~kostl  mseg~kunnr  mseg~kzbew
           mseg~kzvbr  mseg~kzzug  mseg~lgort  mseg~lifnr
           mseg~matnr  mseg~meins  mseg~menge  mseg~lsmng
           mseg~nplnr  mseg~ps_psp_pnr  mseg~rsnum  mseg~rspos
           mseg~shkzg  mseg~sobkz  mseg~vkwrt  mseg~waers
           mseg~werks  mseg~xauto  mseg~zeile  mseg~SGTXT
        into table itab
           from mkpf as mkpf
            inner join mseg as mseg
                    on mkpf~MBLNR = mseg~mblnr
                   and mkpf~mjahr = mseg~mjahr
        WHERE mkpf~budat IN budat
          AND mkpf~usnam IN usnam
          AND mkpf~vgart IN vgart
          AND mkpf~xblnr IN xblnr
          AND mkpf~zshift IN p_shift
          AND mseg~bwart IN bwart
          AND mseg~matnr IN matnr
          AND mseg~werks IN werks
          AND mseg~lgort IN lgort
          AND mseg~charg IN charg
          AND mseg~sobkz IN sobkz
          AND mseg~lifnr IN lifnr
          AND mseg~kunnr IN kunnr.

  • Query takes very long time and analyze table hangs

    Hi
    One of the oracle query taking very long time (ie more than a day) and affecting business requirment of getting the report in time.
    I tried to analyze the table with compute statistics option, however it hangs/runs forever on one of the huge table?
    Please let me know how to troubleshoot this issue

    Hi,
    What's your Oracle version?
    You should use DBMS_STATS package not ANALYZE..
    Regards,

  • Query Taking a long time

    Hi All,
      Working in EBS Version 11.5.10.2
    The below query takes a long time, Please i need some help in this issue
    select ood.organization_name
                    ,to_char(cd.transaction_date,'RRRR/MM/DD HH24:MI:SS') trx_date
                    ,gcc.segment1||'.'||gcc.segment2||'.'||gcc.segment3||'.'||gcc.segment4||'.'||gcc.segment5||'.'||gcc.segment6||'.'||gcc.segment7 account
                    ,cd.base_transaction_value
                    ,decode(transaction_type_name,
                            'Resource transaction',resource_code,
                            'WIP Assy Completion', (select msi.segment1 from mtl_system_items_b msi where msi.inventory_item_id = cd.primary_item_id and msi.organization_id = cd.organization_id)
                            ,(select msi.segment1 from mtl_system_items_b msi where msi.inventory_item_id = cd.inventory_item_id and msi.organization_id = cd.organization_id)
                           ) item_sub_element
                    ,cd.transaction_type_name
                    ,cd.operation_seq_num
                    ,cd.department_code
                    ,cd.resource_seq_num
                    ,cd.subinventory_code
                    ,cd.line_type_name accounting_type
                    ,cd.primary_uom
                    ,cd.primary_quantity
                    ,cd.wip_entity_name job
                    ,cd.basis
                    ,cd.line_id line
                    ,(select wsg.schedule_group_name from wip_schedule_groups wsg
                        where wsg.schedule_group_id = wdj.schedule_group_id
                        and wsg.organization_id = wdj.organization_id
                     ) schedule_group_name
                    ,(select msib.segment1 from mtl_system_items_b msib
                        where msib.inventory_item_id = wdj.primary_item_id
                        and msib.organization_id = wdj.organization_id
                     ) assembly  
                    ,decode(wdj.status_type,3,'Released',4,'Complete',6,'On-Hold',14,'Pending Close',15,'Failed Close',12,'Closed') job_status
                    ,wdj.date_released
                    ,wdj.date_completed job_completion_date
                    ,wdj.date_closed job_closed_date
                    ,decode(wdj.job_type,1,'Standard',3,'Non-Standard') job_type
                    ,wdj.class_code job_class
                    ,cd.reason_name
                    ,cd.reference
                from cst_distribution_v cd
                ,org_organization_definitions ood
                ,gl_code_combinations gcc
                ,wip_discrete_jobs wdj
                where cd.organization_id = ood.organization_id
                and cd.reference_account = gcc.code_combination_id
                and cd.wip_entity_id = wdj.wip_entity_id
                and cd.organization_id = wdj.organization_id
                and cd.transaction_date  between to_date(fdate, 'RRRR/MM/DD HH24:MI:SS') and to_date(tdate, 'RRRR/MM/DD HH24:MI:SS')
                and cd.organization_id = nvl(p_org_id, cd.organization_id)
    Regards
    Vijay

    Thanks Pravin,
    You are right,but after created the function based
    index also it is going for FTS.
    for example ,i created this sample table.
    create index pp_idx1 on pp(substr(mobile_no,-10,4))
    My DB Version :- 10.2
    Optimizer_mode=FIRST_ROWS
    If you can help me.
    Thanks,
    ChitrasenInstead of:
    select * from <table_name> where substr(called_calling_no,-10,4)=9904;Try to stay with the same datatype. Don't rely in implizit type conversions.
    select * from <table_name> where substr(called_calling_no,-10,4)='9904';

  • Sql Query taking very long time to complete

    Hi All,
    DB:oracle 9i R2
    OS:sun solaris 8
    Below is the Sql Query taking very long time to complete
    Could any one help me out regarding this.
    SELECT MAX (md1.ID) ID, md1.request_id, md1.jlpp_transaction_id,
    md1.transaction_version
    FROM transaction_data_arc md1
    WHERE md1.transaction_name = :b2
    AND md1.transaction_type = 'REQUEST'
    AND md1.message_type_code = :b1
    AND NOT EXISTS (
    SELECT NULL
    FROM transaction_data_arc tdar2
    WHERE tdar2.request_id = md1.request_id
    AND tdar2.jlpp_transaction_id != md1.jlpp_transaction_id
    AND tdar2.ID > md1.ID)
    GROUP BY md1.request_id,
    md1.jlpp_transaction_id,
    md1.transaction_version
    Any alternate query to get the same results?
    kindly let me know if any one knows.
    regards,
    kk.
    Edited by: kk001 on Apr 27, 2011 11:23 AM

    Dear
    /* Formatted on 2011/04/27 08:32 (Formatter Plus v4.8.8) */
    SELECT   MAX (md1.ID) ID, md1.request_id, md1.jlpp_transaction_id,
             md1.transaction_version
        FROM transaction_data_arc md1
       WHERE md1.transaction_name = :b2
         AND md1.transaction_type = 'REQUEST'
         AND md1.message_type_code = :b1
         AND NOT EXISTS (
                SELECT NULL
                  FROM transaction_data_arc tdar2
                 WHERE tdar2.request_id = md1.request_id
                   AND tdar2.jlpp_transaction_id != md1.jlpp_transaction_id
                   AND tdar2.ID > md1.ID)
    GROUP BY md1.request_id
            ,md1.jlpp_transaction_id
            ,md1.transaction_versionCould you please post here :
    (a) the available indexes on transaction_data_arc table
    (b) the description of transaction_data_arc table
    (c) and the formatted explain plan you will get after executing the query and issuing:
    select * from table (dbms_xplan.display_cursor);Hope this helps
    Mohamed Houri

  • Analyze a Query which takes longer time in Production server with ST03 only

    Hi,
    I want to Analyze a Query which takes longer time in Production server with ST03 t-code only.
    Please provide me with detail steps as to perform the same with ST03
    ST03 - Expert mode- then I need to know the steps after this. I have checked many threads. So please don't send me the links.
    Write steps in detail please.
    <REMOVED BY MODERATOR>
    Regards,
    Sameer
    Edited by: Alvaro Tejada Galindo on Jun 12, 2008 12:14 PM

    Then please close the thread.
    Greetings,
    Blag.

  • Rank Function taking a long time to execute in SAP HANA

    Hi All,
    I have a couple of reports with rank function which is timing out/ or taking a really long time to execute, Is there any way to get the result in less time when rank functions are involved?
    the following is a sample of how the Query looks,
    SQL 1:
    select      a.column1,
                    b.column1,
                    rank () over(partition by a.column1 order by sum(b.column2) asc)
    from         "_SYS_BIC"."Analyticview1"         b
                    join          "Table1"            a
                      on          (a.column2 = b.column3)
    group by  a.column1,
    b.column1;
    SQL 2:
    select    a.column1,
                    b.column1,
                    rank () over( order by min(b.column1) asc) WJXBFS1
    from         "_SYS_BIC"."Analytic view2"         b
                    cross join                "Table 2"               a
    where      (a.column2  like '%a%'
    and b.column1  between 100 and 200)
    group by  a.column1,
                    b.column1
    when I visualize the execution plan,the rank function is the one taking up a longer time frame. so I executed the same SQL without the rank() or partition or order by(only with Sum() in SQL1 and Min() in SQL 2) even that took a around an hour to get the result.
    1.Does anyone have an any idea to make these queries to execute faster?
    2. Does the latency have anything to do with the rank function or could it be size of the result set?
    3. is there any workaround to implement these rank function/partition inside the Analytic view itself? if yes, will this make it give the result faster?
    Thank you for your help!!
    -Gayathri

    Krishna,
    I tried both of them, Graphical and CE function,
    It is also taking a long time to execute
    Graphical view giving me the following error after 2 hr and 36 minutes
    Could not execute 'SELECT ORDER_ID,ITEM_ID,RANK from "_SYS_BIC"."EMMAPERF/ORDER_FACT_HANA_CV" group by ...' in 2:36:23.411 hours .
    SAP DBTech JDBC: [2048]: column store error: search table error:  [2620] executor: plan operation failed
    CE function - I aborted after 40 mins
    Do you know the syntax to declare local variable to use in CE function?

  • Getting Long time to execute select count(*) statement.

    Hi all,
    My table have 40 columns and it doesn't have the primary key column. it contain more than 5M records. it's taking long time to execute simple sql statement.
    Such as select (*) take 1min and 30 sec. If i use select count(index_colunm) then it finished with in 3s. i did the following workarounds.
    Analyzed the table.
    created required indexes.
    yet getting the same performance issues. please help me to solve this issue
    Thanks

    BlueDiamond wrote:
    COUNT(*) counts the number of rows produced by the query, whereas COUNT(1) counts the number of 1 values.Would you care to show details that prove that?
    In fact, if you use count(1) then the optimizer actually re-writes that internally as count(*).
    Count(*) and Count(1) are have identical executions.
    Re: Count(*)/Count(1)
    http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:6346014113972638::::P11_QUESTION_ID:1156159920245

  • Query is taking more time to execute

    Hi,
    Query is taking more time to execute.
    But when i execute same query in other server then it is giving immediate output.
    What is the reason of it.
    thanks in advance.

    'My car doesn't start, please help me to start my car'
    Do you think we are clairvoyant?
    Or is your salary subtracted for every letter you type here?
    Please be aware this is not a chatroom, and we can not see your webcam.
    Sybrand Bakker
    Senior Oracle DBA

Maybe you are looking for