Essbase performance issue

Hi all,
We encounter a Essbase perfromance issue that we don't know the root cause.
We have configured a server to run Essbase with 8 core CPU and 16GB RAM. We found that the Essbase calculation can use up to 80% CPU and about 8GB RAM only. I also checked the IO rate at the same time but the disk loading is not very heavy. We just suspect that what kind of resource are waiting at Essbase calculation engine? It is not CPU bounded, memory bounded, and IO bounded.
Do you think it can help if we keep the whole Essbase database (around 30GB) into RAM based disk drive can speed up the IO performance?
Thanks if you have some ideas for us to investigate.
Edited by: hyperion planning user on Jun 2, 2009 12:27 AM
Edited by: hyperion planning user on Jun 2, 2009 12:36 AM

I'm confused -- is it CPU bound or not?
You write:
We found that the Essbase calculation can use up to 80% CPU and about 8GB RAM only.Do you mean 80% of all eight of your CPUs? That sure sounds CPU-bound to me. In fact, I wish (within reason) that most of my Essbase calculations worked that way -- that would men that I have the disck caches tuned to their utmost efficiency.
This means you're getting data from disk almost as fast as is possible.
You're not going to be able to get everything into memory for two reasons:
1) 30 GB of .IND and .PAG/.DAT files isn't going to fit into Essbase's addressable memory space. See: using RAM disk to speed up Essbase calculation and rollup
2) Even when the database is nice and small and you can stick the whole thing in a cache, uncompressed, Essbase still is "smart" and will keep a portion of it on disk during calcs -- this doesn't make sense in isolation, but empirically, you can monitor disk usage during a supposedly database that is in theory total enclosed in the cache and see it getting hit. This may be related to Essbase's general housekeeping -- I don't know. In any case, this is generally not a real world case, unless you're running your business on my Very Favorite Database In The Whole Wide World -- Sample.Basic.
Or are you saying that you will define a real (and it would help if you really could allocate real RAM, and not an OS-managed sort-of-RAM-sort-of-DASD situation) RAM drive and point Essbase there. That is sort of risky, isn't it? How will you flush it to real DASD for backup? Exports?
Regards,
Cameron Lackpour

Similar Messages

Essbase performance issues.

Hello All,
I have performance issues with my production environment, A business rule which takes 1 min in development is taking 1 hour in production. Please check the below db stats of both dev and production and suggest how do I improve the performance of my prod environment.
Please suggest.
Development DB Stats:
Number of dimensions : 10
Declared Block Size : 15480
Actual Block Size : 2054
Declared Maximum Blocks : 2994072984
Actual Maximum Blocks : 461888000
Number of Non Missing Leaf Blocks : 92816
Number of Non Missing Non Leaf Blocks : 81682
Number of Total Blocks : 174498
Index Type : B+ TREE
Average Block Density : 2.833496
Average Sparse Density : 0.03777929
Block Compression Ratio : 0.04448376
Average Clustering Ratio : 0.9954448
Average Fragmentation Quotient : 4.008706
Free Space Recovery is Needed : No
Estimated Bytes of Recoverable Free Space : 0
Production DB Stats:
Number of dimensions : 10
Declared Block Size : 25960
Actual Block Size : 4836
Declared Maximum Blocks : 4891740480
Actual Maximum Blocks : 673470000
Number of Non Missing Leaf Blocks : 253394
Number of Non Missing Non Leaf Blocks : 214641
Number of Total Blocks : 468035
Index Type : B+ TREE
Average Block Density : 1.284533
Average Sparse Density : 0.06949604
Block Compression Ratio : 0.02112074
Average Clustering Ratio : 0.424468
Average Fragmentation Quotient : 34.6661
Free Space Recovery is Needed : No
Estimated Bytes of Recoverable Free Space :0

Hello Glenn,
Thanks for the reply,
These are the cache and the CFG file settings, both are same for dev and Prod. The calculation is a driver based calc and its same in dev and prod.
These are same for production and development
Index Cache - 50000 KB
Datafile Cache - 32768 KB
Data Cache - 50000 KB
CFG FILE SETTINGS:
NETDELAY 1000
NETRETRYCOUNT 1500
SSPROCROWLIMIT 500000
LOCKTIMEOUT 600
CALCLOCKBLOCKHIGH 5500
CALCLOCKBLOCKDEFAULT 3500
CALCLOCKBLOCKLOW 100
CalcNoticeHigh 20
CalcNoticeDefault 10
CalcNoticeLow 5
CalcCacheHigh 199229440
CalcCacheDefault 104857600
CalcCacheLow 52428800
DLSINGLETHREADPERSTAGE FALSE
DLTHREADSPREPARE 4
DLTHREADSWRITE 3
;AGENTTHREADS 25
;AGTSVRCONNECTIONS 10
;AGENTDELAY 60
;MAXLOGINS 50000
;GRIDEXPANSION FALSE

Essbase Performance Issues on Sun Solaris 10

We have a new Hyperion Environment 11.1.1.3 with Essbase sitting on a Solaris box. We are running a calculation script under the "FINSTMT" database that is called CALCALL. This is the default calculation for a database in Essbase (it runs a command called CALC ALL). We are running this same calc against the same database outline and data set across the environments to benchmark performance.
The script in the new environment should run faster, but it runs slower. The server is basically sleeping and we were curious if anyone can recommend configurations within the app or for the OS? Things like semiphors, shared memory, etc... Also if anyone has suggests or ideals to tweak Essbase performance on a Solaris 10 machine and/or UNIX. What should I do to the Essbase.config file?
Mike

I can't help you solaris tuning, but some things to look at.
1. Is the Essbase.cfg file the same on both servers? You might have parallel calculation turned on in one and not the other. Caches could also be set differently
2. Are the database caches set the same? This could impact performance as well
3. Are you doing an apples to apples comparison? Is one database loaded and recalculated many times while the other is not (or restructured or reloaded)

Essbase performance issue when calc scripts are run on FDM cube on same server

We have a large Essbase application which has high usage on a daily basis, which is being impacted when we run Calc scripts on an FDM forecast cube which is on the same server. The large application is on EIS 11.1.2 and the FDM cubes are being migrated to the same server and also being upgraded from EIS 7.1 on Unix to EIS 11.1.2 on NT. Every time the Calc scripts are run on the FDM cube, the performance of the Essbase application is degraded and it shuts down after some time.

Sudhir,
Do you work at a help desk or are you a consultant? you ask such a varied range of questions I think the former. If you do work at a help desk, don't you have a next level support that could help you? If you are a consultant, I suggest getting together with another consultant that actually knows more. You might also want to close some of your questions,. You have 24 open and perhaps give points to those that helped you.

Performance issues with Planning data load & Agg in 11.1.2.3.500

We recently upgraded from 11.1.1.3 to 11.1.2.3. Post upgrade we face performance issues with one of our Planning job (eg: Job E). It takes 3x the time to complete in our new environment (11.1.2.3) when compared to the old one (11.1.1.3). This job loads then actual data and does the aggregation. The pattern which we noticed is , if we run a restructure on the application and execute this job immediately it gets completed as the same time as 11.1.1.3. However, in current production (11.1.1.3) the job runs in the following sequence Job A->Job B-> Job C->Job D->Job E and it completes on time, but if we do the same test in 11.1.2.3 in the above sequence it take 3x the time . We dont have a window to restructure the application to before running Job E every time in Prod. Specs of the new Env is much higher than the old one.
We have Essbase clustering (MS active/passive) in the new environment and the files are stored in the SAN drive. Could this be because of this? has any one faced performance issues in the clustered environment?

Do you have exactly same Essbase config settings and calculations performing AGG ? . Remember something very small like UPDATECALC ON/OFF can make a BIG difference in timing..

Performance issue with Hyperion Interactive Reporting Report

Hi,
We created a report in Hyperion Interactive reporting using Hyperion Essbase as database connection file .
Report performance was good in Interactive reporting Studio we don't have any problem in studio.
when we open the report in Hyperion Workspace report performance is very very slow. We are using system 11.1.1.3
Any suggestions to resolve performance issue will be really helpful.
Thanks in advance
Regards
Vamsi

Thank you so much, It is working fine when the report is in table structure (List Report. I mean insert a table and drag and drop the fact items and dimention items in to the table)
The requirement is looks like that, it is not a pivot table. Now I want apply the different color or shadow for Item1 and Item 2 in all groups... Please help me.
Total Fact Fact 1 fact 2 Fact 3 ......
Group 1
Item 1 Item 1 000 000 000 000 ...
Item 2 Item2 000 000 000 000 ....
Group 2
Item 1 Item 1 000 000 000 000 ...
Item 2 Item2 000 000 000 000 ....
Group 3
Item 1 Item 1 000 000 000 000
Item 2 Item2 000 000 000 000
Thanks and Regards,
Murugan

Hyperion Interactive reporting performance issue.

Hi,
We created a report in Hyperion Interactive reporting using Hyperion Essbase as database connection file .
Report performance was good in Interactive reporting Studio we don't have any problem in studio.
when we open the the report in Hyperion Workspace We are facing performance issue of the report and also when i hit refresh button to refresh data in the Workspace,i am getting the following error message
*"An Interactive Reporting Service error has occurred - Failed to acquire requested service. Error Code : 2001"*
Any suggestions to resolve this will be really helpful.
Thanks in advance
Thanks
Vamsi
Edited by: user9363364 on Aug 24, 2010 7:49 AM
Edited by: user9363364 on Sep 1, 2010 7:59 AM

Hi
i also faced such an issue and then i found the answer on metalink
Error: "An Interactive Reporting Service Error has Occurred. Failed to Acquire Requested Service. Error Code: 2001" when Processing a bqy Report in Workspace. [ID 1117395.1]
Applies to:
Hyperion BI+ - Version: 11.1.1.2.00 and later [Release: 11.1 and later ]
Information in this document applies to any platform.
Symptoms
Obtaining the following error when trying to process a BQY that uses an Essbase data source in Workspace:
"An Interactive Reporting Service error has occurred. Failed to acquire requested service. Error Code: 2001".
Cause
The name of the data source in the CMC contained the machine name in fully qualified name format whereas the OCE contained the machine name only. This mismatch in machine names caused the problem. Making the machine name identical in both cases resolved the problem.
Solution
Ensure that the name of the data source as specified in the OCE in Interactive Reporting Studio matches the name specified in the CMC tool in the field "Enter the name of the data source".
In fact, all fields need to match between the OCE and the CMC Data Source.
regards
alex

Performance issue with 9.3.1

We have recently re-hosted our Essbase server to Sun UltraSPARC-T2 (64 threads) from our 8 x UltraSPARC-IV machine, and started experiencing some performance issue. Users have complained that it takes longer time to retrieve the data. Our regular nightly export is taken longer time to run as well. The SA suspected that the application is not taking advantage of the coolthreads.
Is there any configuration change needed to improve the performance on our new server?
Thanks,
Kin

assuming you have a support contract with Oracle, please make sure you have downloaded the latest service pack for HFM 9.3.1. look for patch number 7451683 in Metalink3 "Patches and Downloads" section.

Performance issue when a Direct I/O option is selected

Hello Experts,
One of my customers has a performance issue when a Direct I/O option is selected. Reports that there was increase in memory usage when Direct I/O storage option is selected when compared to Buffered I/O option.
There are two applications on the server of type BSO. When using Buffered I/O, experienced a high level of Read and Write I/O's. Using Direct I/O reduces the Read and Write I/O's, but dramatically increases memory usage.
Other Information -
a) Environment Details
HSS - 9.3.1.0.45, AAS - 9.3.1.0.0.135, Essbase - 9.3.1.2.00 (64-bit)
OS: Microsoft Windows x64 (64-bit) 2003 R2
b) What is the memory usage when Buffered I/O and Direct I/O is used? How about running calculations, database restructures, and database queries? Do these processes take much time for execution?
Application 1: Buffered 700MB, Direct 5GB
Application 2: Buffered 600MB to 1.5GB, Direct 2GB
Calculation times may increase from 15 minutes to 4 hours. Same with restructure.
c) What is the current Database Data cache; Data file cache and Index cache values?
Application 1: Buffered (Index 80MB, Data 400MB), Direct (Index 120MB; Data File 4GB, Data 480MB).
Application 2: Buffered (Index 100MB, Data 300MB), Direct (Index 700MB, Data File 1.5GB, Data 300MB)
d) What is the total size of the ess0000x.pag files and ess0000x.ind files?
Application 1: Page File 20GB, Index 1.7GB.
Application 2: Page 3GB, index 700MB.
Any suggestions on how to improve the performance when Direct I/O is selected? Any performance documents relating to above scenario would be of great help.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Sudhir

Sudhir,
Do you work at a help desk or are you a consultant? you ask such a varied range of questions I think the former. If you do work at a help desk, don't you have a next level support that could help you? If you are a consultant, I suggest getting together with another consultant that actually knows more. You might also want to close some of your questions,. You have 24 open and perhaps give points to those that helped you.

Report Performance Issue - Activity

Hi gurus,
I'm developing an Activity report using Transactional database (Online real time object).
the purpose of the report is to list down all contacts related activities and activities NOT related to Contact by activity owner (user id).
In order to fullfill that requirment I've created 2 report
1) All Activities related to Contact -- Report A
pull in Acitivity ID , Activity Type, Status, Contact ID
2) All Activities not related to Contact UNION All Activities related to Contact (Base report) -- Report B
to get the list of activities not related to contact i'm using Advanced filter based on result of another request which is I think is the part that slow down the query.
<Activity ID not equal to any Activity ID in Report B>
Anyone encountered performance issue due to the advanced filter in analytic before?
any input is really appriciated
Thanks in advanced,
Fina

Fina,
Union is always the last option. If you can get all record in one report, do not use union.
since all records, which you are targeting, are in the activity subject area, it is not nessecery to combine reports. add a column with the following logic
if contact id is null (or = 'Unspecified') then owner name else contact name
Hopefully, this is helping.

Report performance Issue in BI Answers

Hi All,
We have a performance issues with reports. Report is running more than 10 mins. we took query from the session log and ran it in database, at that time it took not more than 2 mins. We have verified proper indexes on the where clause columns.
Could any once suggest to improve the performance in BI answers?
Thanks in advance,

I hope you dont have many case statements and complex calculations that you do in the Answers.
Next thing you need to monitor is how many rows of data that you are trying to retrieve from the query. If the volume is huge then it takes time to do the formatting on the Answers as you are going to dump huge volumes of data. Database(like teradata) returns initially like 1-2000 records if you hit show all records then even db is gonna fair amount of time if you are dumping many records
hope it helps
thanks
Prash

BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

Hi Masters,
I am working out for a solution for BW report developed in 0bcs_vc10 virtual cube.
Some of the querys is taking more 15 to 20 minutes to execute the report.
This is huge performance issue. We are using BW 3.5, and report devloped in bex and published thru portal. Any one faced similar problem please advise how you tackle this issue. Please give the detail analysis approach how you resolved this issue.
Current service pack we are using is
SAP_BW 350 0016 SAPKW35016
FINBASIS 300 0012 SAPK-30012INFINBASIS
BI_CONT 353 0008 SAPKIBIFP8
SEM-BW 400 0012 SAPKGS4012
Best of Luck
Chris
BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

Ravi,
I already did that, it is not helping me much for the performance. Reports are taking 15 t0 20 minutes. I wanted any body in this forum have the same issue how
they resolved it.
Regards,
Chris

Interested by performance issue ? Read this ! If you can explain, you're a master Jedi !

This is the question we will try to answer...
What si the bottle neck (hardware) of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6
I used PPBM5 as a benchmark testing template.
All the data and log as been collected using performance counter
First of all, describe my computer...
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 8 Pro 64-bit
CPU
Intel Xeon E5 2687W @ 3.10GHz
Sandy Bridge-EP/EX 32nm Technology
RAM
Corsair Dominator Platinum 64.0 GB DDR3
Motherboard
EVGA Corporation Classified SR-X
Graphics
PNY Nvidia Quadro 6000
EVGA Nvidia GTX 680 // Yes, I created bench stats for both card
Hard Drives
16.0GB Romex RAMDISK (RAID)
556GB LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed (RAID 0)
I have other RAID installed, but not relevant for the present post...
PSU
Cosair 1000 Watts
After many days of tests, I wanna share my results with community and comment them.
CPU Introduction
I tested my cpu and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit, can I reach this limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 1).
Intro : I tested my E5-XEON 2687W (8 Cores Hyperthread - 16 threads) to know if programs can use the maximum of it. I used Prime 95 to get the result. // I know this seem to be ordinary, but you will understand soon...
The result : Yes, I can get 100% of my CPU with 1 program using 20 threads in parallel. The CPU gives everything it can !
Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test...
(picture 1)
Disk Introduction
I tested my disk and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 2).
Intro : I tested my RAID 0 556GB (LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed) to know if I can reach the maximum % disk usage (0% idle Time)
The result : As you can see in picture 2, yes, I can get the max of my drive at ~ 1.2 Gb/sec read/write steady !
Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test to see the impact of transfering many Go of data during ~10 sec...
(picture 2)
Now, I know my limits ! It's time to enter deeper in the subject !
PPBM5 (H.264) Result
I rendered the sequence (H.264) using Adobe Media Encoder.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%, the turn around 50%
My Disk is totally idle !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate seem to be a wave (up and down). Probably caused by (Encrypt time.... write.... Encrypt time.... write...) // It's ok, ~5Mb/sec during transfert rate !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 39 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~65 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
GPU Load on card seem to be a wave also ! (up and down) ~40% usage of GPU during the process of encoding.
GPU Ram get 1.2Go of RAM (But with GTX 680, no problem and Quadro 6000 with 6 GB RAM, no problem !)
Comment/Question : CPU is free (50%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (60%), RAM is free (62%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result !
(picture 3)
PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (RAID LSI)
I rendered the sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder on my RAID 0 LSI disk.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%
My Disk wave and wave again, but far far from the limit !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down). Probably caused by (Buffering time.... write.... Buffering time.... write...) // It's ok, ~375Mb/sec peak during transfert rate ! Easy !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 40.5 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~48 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
GPU Load on card = 0 (This kind of encoding is GPU irrelevant)
GPU Ram get 400Mb of RAM (No usage for encoding)
Comment/Question : CPU is free (65%), disks are free (60%), GPU is free (100%), RAM is free (63%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
(picture 4)
PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (Direct in RAMDrive)
I rendered the same sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder directly in my RamDrive
Comment/Question : Look at the transfert rate under (picture 5). It's exactly the same speed than with my RAID 0 LSI controller. Impossible ! Look in the same picture the transfert rate I can reach with the ramdrive (> 3.0 Gb/sec steady) and I don't go under 30% of disk usage. CPU is idle (70%), Disk is idle (100%), GPU is idle (100%) and RAM is free (63%). // This kind of results let me REALLY confused. It's smell bug and big problem with hardware and IO usage in CS6 !
(picture 5)
PPBM5 (MPEG-DVD) Result
I rendered the sequence (MPEG-DVD) using Adobe Media Encoder.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%
My Disk is totally idle !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down). Probably caused by (Encoding time.... write.... Encoding time.... write...) // It's ok, ~2Mb/sec during transfert rate ! Real Joke !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 40 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~80 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Lot of thread, but it's ok in multi-thread apps!)
GPU Load on card = 100 (This use the maximum of my GPU)
GPU Ram get 1Gb of RAM
Comment/Question : CPU is free (70%), disks are free (98%), GPU is loaded (MAX), RAM is free (63%), my computer is pushed at limit during the encoding process for GPU only. Now, for this kind of encoding, the speed limit is affected by the slower IO (Video Card GPU)
Other : Quadro 6000 is slower than GTX 680 for this kind of encoding (~20 s slower than GTX).
(picture 6)
Encoding single clip FULL HD AVCHD to H.264 Result (Premiere Pro CS6)
You can look the result in the picture.
Comment/Question : CPU is free (55%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (90%), RAM is free (65%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Adobe Premiere seem to have some bug with thread management. My hardware is idle ! I understand AVCHD can be very difficult to decode, but where is the waste ? My computer want, but the software not !
(picture 7)
Render composition using 3D Raytracer in After Effects CS6
You can look the result in the picture.
Comment : GPU seems to be the bottle neck when using After Effects. CPU is free (99%), Disks are free (98%), Memory is free (60%) and it depend of the setting and type of project.
Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result in time for rendering the composition.
(picture 8)
Conclusion
There is nothing you can do (I thing) with CS6 to get better performance actually. GTX 680 is the best (Consumer grade card) and the Quadro 6000 is the best (Profressional card). Both of card give really similar result (I will probably return my GTX 680 since I not really get any better performance). I not used Tesla card with my Quadro, but actually, both, Premiere Pro & After Effects doesn't use multi GPU. I tried to used both card together (GTX & Quadro), but After Effects gives priority to the slower card (In this case, the GTX 680)
Premiere Pro, I'm speechless ! Premiere Pro is not able to get max performance of my computer. Not just 10% or 20%, but average 60%. I'm a programmor, multi-threadling apps are difficult to manage and I can understand Adobe's programmor. But actually, if anybody have comment about this post, tricks or any kind of solution, you can comment this post. It's seem to be a bug...
Thank you.

Patrick,
I can't explain everything, but let me give you some background as I understand it.
The first issue is that CS6 has a far less efficient internal buffering or caching system than CS5/5.5. That is why the MPEG encoding in CS6 is roughly 2-3 times slower than the same test with CS5. There is some 'under-the-hood' processing going on that causes this significant performance loss.
The second issue is that AME does not handle regular memory and inter-process memory very well. I have described this here: Latest News
As to your test results, there are some other noteworthy things to mention. 3D Ray tracing in AE is not very good in using all CUDA cores. In fact it is lousy, it only uses very few cores and the threading is pretty bad and does not use the video card's capabilities effectively. Whether that is a driver issue with nVidia or an Adobe issue, I don't know, but whichever way you turn it, the end result is disappointing.
The overhead AME carries in our tests is something we are looking into and the next test will only use direct export and no longer the AME queue, to avoid some of the problems you saw. That entails other problems for us, since we lose the capability to check encoding logs, but a solution is in the works.
You see very low GPU usage during the H.264 test, since there are only very few accelerated parts in the timeline, in contrast to the MPEG2-DVD test, where there is rescaling going on and that is CUDA accelerated. The disk I/O test suffers from the problems mentioned above and is the reason that my own Disk I/O results are only 33 seconds with the current test, but when I extend the duration of that timeline to 3 hours, the direct export method gives me 22 seconds, although the amount of data to be written, 37,092 MB has increased threefold. An effective write speed of 1,686 MB/s.
There are a number of performance issues with CS6 that Adobe is aware of, but whether they can be solved and in what time, I haven't the faintest idea.
Just my $ 0.02

Performance Issue for BI system

Hello,
We are facing performance issues for BI System. Its a preproductive system and its performance is degrading badly everyday. I was checking system came to know program buffer hit ratio is increaasing everyday due to high Swaps. So asked to change the parameter abap/buffersize which was 300Mb to 500Mb. But still no major improvement is found in the system.
There is 16GB Ram available and Server is HP-UX and with Netweaver2004s with Oracle 10.2.0.4.0 installed in it.
The Main problem is while running a report or creating a query is taking way too long time.
Kindly help me.

Hello SIva,
Thanks for your reply but i have checked ST02 and ST03 and also SM50 and its normal
we are having 9 dialog processes, 3 Background , 2 Update and 1 spool.
No one is using the system currently but in ST02 i can see the swaps are in red.
Buffer                 HitRatio   % Alloc. KB Freesp. KB   % Free Sp.   Dir. Size FreeDirEnt   % Free Dir    Swaps    DB Accs
Nametab (NTAB)                                                                                0
   Table definition     99,60     6.798                                                   20.000                                            29.532    153.221
   Field definition     99,82      31.562        784                 2,61           20.000      6.222          31,11          17.246     41.248
   Short NTAB           99,94     3.625      2.446                81,53          5.000        2.801          56,02             0            2.254
   Initial records      73,95        6.625        998                 16,63          5.000        690             13,80             40.069     49.528
                                                                                0
boldprogram                97,66     300.000     1.074                 0,38           75.000     67.177        89,57           219.665    725.703bold
CUA                    99,75         3.000        875                   36,29          1.500      1.401          93,40            55.277      2.497
Screen                 99,80         4.297      1.365                 33,35          2.000      1.811          90,55              119         3.214
Calendar              100,00       488            361                  75,52            200         42              21,00               0            158
OTR                   100,00         4.096      3.313                  100,00        2.000      2.000          100,00              0
                                                                                0
Tables                                                                                0
   Generic Key          99,17    29.297      1.450                  5,23           5.000        350             7,00             2.219      3.085.633
   Single record        99,43    10.000      1.907                  19,41           500         344            68,80              39          467.978
                                                                                0
Export/import          82,75     4.096         43                      1,30            2.000        662          33,10            137.208
Exp./ Imp. SHM         89,83     4.096        438                    13,22         2.000      1.482          74,10               0
SAP Memory      Curr.Use %    CurUse[KB]    MaxUse[KB]    In Mem[KB]    OnDisk[KB]    SAPCurCach      HitRatio %
Roll area               2,22                5.832               22.856             131.072     131.072                   IDs           96,61
Page area              1,08              2.832                24.144               65.536    196.608              Statement     79,00
Extended memory     22,90       958.464           1.929.216          4.186.112          0                                         0,00
Heap memory                                    0                  0                    1.473.767          0                                         0,00
Call Stati             HitRatio %     ABAP/4 Req      ABAP Fails     DBTotCalls         AvTime[ms]      DBRowsAff.
Select single     88,59               63.073.369        5.817.659      4.322.263             0                         57.255.710
Select               72,68               284.080.387          0               13.718.442             0                        32.199.124
Insert                 0,00                  151.955             5.458             166.159               0                           323.725
Update               0,00                    378.161           97.884           395.814               0                            486.880
Delete                 0,00                    389.398          332.619          415.562              0                             244.495
Edited by: Srikanth Sunkara on May 12, 2011 11:50 AM

RE: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte3M

Hi James,
Could you give me a call, I am at my desk.
I had meetings all day and couldn't respond to your calls earlier.
-----Original Message-----
From: James Min [mailto:jminbrio.forte.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:50 PM
To: Sharma, Sandeep; Pyatetskiy, Alexander
Cc: sophiaforte.com; kenlforte.com; Tenerelli, Mike
Subject: Re: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte 3M
Hello,
I just want to reiterate that we are very committed to working on
this issue, and that our goal is to find out the root of the problem. But
first I'd like to narrow down the avenues by process of elimination.
Open Cursor is something that is commonly used in today's RDBMS. I
know that you must test your query in ISQL using some kind of execute
immediate, but Sybase should be able to handle an open cursor. I was
wondering if your Sybase expert commented on the fact that the server is
not responding to commonly used command like 'open cursor'. According to
our developer, we are merely following the API from Sybase, and open cursor
is not something that particularly slows down a query for several minutes
(except maybe the very first time). The logs show that Forte is waiting for
a status from the DB server. Actually, using prepared statements and open
cursor ends up being more efficient in the long run.
Some questions:
1) Have you tried to do a prepared statement with open cursor in your ISQL
session? If so, did it have the same slowness?
2) How big is the table you are querying? How many rows are there? How many
are returned?
3) When there is a hang in Forte, is there disk-spinning or CPU usage in
the database server side? On the Forte side? Absolutely no activity at all?
We actually have a Sybase set-up here, and if you wish, we could test out
your database and Forte PEX here. Since your queries seems to be running
off of only one table, this might be the best option, as we could look at
everything here, in house. To do this:
a) BCP out the data into a flat file. (character format to make it portable)
b) we need a script to create the table and indexes.
c) the Forte PEX file of the app to test this out.
d) the SQL staement that you issue in ISQL for comparison.
If the situation warrants, we can give a concrete example of
possible errors/bugs to a developer. Dial-in is still an option, but to be
able to look at the TOOL code, database setup, etc. without the limitations
of dial-up may be faster and more efficient. Please let me know if you can
provide this, as well as the answers to the above questions, or if you have
any questions.
Regards,
At 08:05 AM 3/30/00 -0500, Sharma, Sandeep wrote:
James, Ken:
FYI, see attached response from our Sybase expert, Dani Sasmita. She has
already tried what you suggested and results are enclosed.
++
Sandeep
-----Original Message-----
From: SASMITA, DANIAR
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 6:43 PM
To: Pyatetskiy, Alexander
Cc: Sharma, Sandeep; Tenerelli, Mike
Subject: Re: FW: Case 59063: Select using LIKE has performance
issues
w/ CTLIB and Forte 3M
We did that trick already.
When it is hanging, I can see what is doing.
It is doing OPEN CURSOR. But not clear the exact statement of the cursor
it is trying to open.
When we run the query directly to Sybase, not using Forte, it is clearly
not opening any cursor.
And running it directly to Sybase many times, the response is always
consistently fast.
It is just when the query runs from Forte to Sybase, it opens a cursor.
But again, in the Forte code, Alex is not using any cursor.
In trying to capture the query,we even tried to audit any statementcoming
to Sybase. Same thing, just open cursor. No cursor declaration anywhere.==============================================
James Min
Technical Support Engineer - Forte Tools
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
1800 Harrison St., 17th Fl.
Oakland, CA 94612
james.minsun.com
510.869.2056
==============================================
Support Hotline: 510-451-5400
CUSTOMERS open a NEW CASE with Technical Support:
http://www.forte.com/support/case_entry.html
CUSTOMERS view your cases and enter follow-up transactions:
http://www.forte.com/support/view_calls.html

Earthlink wrote:
Contrary to my understanding, the <font face="courier">with_pipeline</font> procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy <font face="courier">no_pipeline</font> procedure. Am I missing something? Well, we're missing a lot here.
Like:
- a database version
- how did you test
- what data do you have, how is it distributed, indexed
and so on.
If you want to find out what's going on then use a TRACE with wait events.
All nessecary steps are explained in these threads:
HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
Another nice one is RUNSTATS:
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/ASKTOM.download_file?p_file=6551378329289980701

Essbase performance issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for