F.13 (SAPF124) not clearning balances

Hi Folks,
I am facing a situation where for few transactions GR /IR is not getting cleared while running F.13; I have checked both the documents and seems fine. Also I have checked the setting in OB74; all the relevant criteria have been specified. (Assignment, Purchasing number, amount)
Can any one please let me know where to look-in to solve this issue, there are few transaction dated 2004.
FYI: we are using 4.7 versions

hi Ravi,
yes i think mr11 is the right way (but that's not my sphere
look SAP ERP Manufacturing - Production Planning (SAP PP)
regards Andreas

Similar Messages

DME and FI posting not in balance.

Hello Experts,
Can any one please provide information on DME and FI posting not in balance.
We are working on Concurrent employment, my client have problem with in balance amounts.
Like GL account we run 10 batches together and compare with DME and we find lots of difference between two.
We run wage type report also and again we find difference too.
Please provide your adivse and suggestions how to over come with this situation. We want to get balance between DME and FI postings.
Thanks,
DV

hello parul,
For the error "status object is not assign to status profile" check wether the status profile is assigned to that WBS. If not then assign the status profile to it.
If still the problem exists then check in status profile transaction OK02 for that perticular user status in object type WBS element is selected or not.
Also check whether system status of your WBS element is Released.
Regards,
sudhir

Error Message:Not enough balance in bond/UT1

Dear Expert,
I am creating ARE1 document excise under Running bond through tr cd J1IA101 in development client but at the time of posting ARE1 document system is giving error message" Not enough balance in bond/UT1: 0000010019 / 2010" Message no. 4F227 (error)
and "Reservation amount is greater than the balance in the bond!"(warning)
I checked the balance in bond it is really less but my client some times creating ARE1 document with negative bond balance because of delay in proof of export document for previous ARE1 documents and now we are implemening the ARE1 generation through sap.
i want to know is it possible to change this error message to warning message or is their any other way to allow the system to generate ARE1 document with nagative bond balance.
thanks in advance
warm regards
ravi

HI
this is to inform you that
LSEUAF04                          1207         MESSAGE I200 WITH FINDOBJECT MESSAGESTRING SCOPEOBJECT
                                                                     RAISING NOT_FOUND.
                                  1258       MESSAGE I200 WITH FINDOBJECT MESSAGESTRING SCOPEOBJECT
                                                                   RAISING NOT_FOUND.
                                  1273         MESSAGE I200 WITH FINDOBJECT MESSAGESTRING SCOPEOBJECT
                                                       SCOPE_OBJ RAISING NOT_FOUND.
the error which you are showing in the thread is dynamicall called from other program through the variables.
convert this error message to warning message
hope this clears your issue.
balajia

2 nodes in a RAC not load balanced well

Our db is 2 nodes RAC with version of 10.2.0.3.0 on window 2003 server. I am wondering what else we may need to look into besides tnsnames.ora file to well balance the load between those two instances. Currently our
db is not well balanced based on the following two things:
1) query against gv$session
2) different amount of archive log files created in those two servers
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Shirley

1) query against gv$sessionMay be check the load on the individual servers as well and check to make sure that the LOCAL_LISTENER and REMOTE_LISTENER parameters are set correctly.
2) different amount of archive log files created in those two serversI don't think measuring this would be a valid metric to evaluate the effectiveness of load balancing and this is not taken into consideration by oracle while load balacing the connections....
HTH
Thanks
-Chandra Pabba

Cluster not load-balancing, ideas?

I've been struggling to identify why my JMS producers are not load-balancing against a remote cluster.
          I've ruled out the producer as being the problem (I see the same non-load-balancing behavior regardless of what I use to create messages - Hermes, ALSB, simple Java producer...) I also don't think the JMS Connection Factory config is the problem, judging by the help I've received from folks over on the jms forum.
          I believe something is wrong with our cluster setup because in addition to the problem I just mentioned, we also are not seeing JNDI entries propagate to all managed servers - for example, if I create one jms queue on m1, that queue does not appear in the jndi tree on m2.
          I've been trying to find any documentation on what settings I should look at to verify the cluster configuration. If I go through the WLS console and look at the Cluster settings, I see both managed servers there, is there some other place that the configuration could be messed up?
          Added 6/11, 9:30 am:
          We're focusing on multicast now as the most likely problem. Can anyone tell me whether clusters on the same multicast address but different ports will interfere with each other? It looks like the infrastructure team has set up 5 clusters like that (same multicast address in each cluster, but different ports).
          We've got a ticket open with BEA but it's been two weeks now and nothing except requests for more information.
          Any ideas/help are much appreciated!
          Meghan
          Edited by pietila at 06/11/2008 7:38 AM

Meghan Pietila wrote:
          > I've been struggling to identify why my JMS producers are not load-balancing against a remote cluster.
          >
          > I've ruled out the producer as being the problem (I see the same non-load-balancing behavior regardless of what I use to create messages - Hermes, ALSB, simple Java producer...) I also don't think the JMS Connection Factory config is the problem, judging by the help I've received from folks over on the jms forum.
          >
          > I believe something is wrong with our cluster setup because in addition to the problem I just mentioned, we also are not seeing JNDI entries propagate to all managed servers - for example, if I create one jms queue on m1, that queue does not appear in the jndi tree on m2.
          >
          > I've been trying to find any documentation on what settings I should look at to verify the cluster configuration. If I go through the WLS console and look at the Cluster settings, I see both managed servers there, is there some other place that the configuration could be messed up?
          >
          > Added 6/11, 9:30 am:
          > We're focusing on multicast now as the most likely problem. Can anyone tell me whether clusters on the same multicast address but different ports will interfere with each other? It looks like the infrastructure team has set up 5 clusters like that (same multicast address in each cluster, but different ports).
          >
          > We've got a ticket open with BEA but it's been two weeks now and nothing except requests for more information.
          >
          > Any ideas/help are much appreciated!
          >
          > Meghan
          >
          > --
          > Edited by pietila at 06/11/2008 7:38 AM
          You could be right. I think we have had problems where the same IP but
          different ports were used for multicast. This is on 8.1 though.
          I think as a rule, it's best to have a different ip and port for each
          cluster.
          Also - can you be sure that no one else is using the multicast addresses
          on the network for anything else - we had someone bring up a test
          cluster using our addresses which caused a few issues and took a while
          to find! We also have security cameras which also use multicast, which
          if they are using the same address/port can cause issues!
          We're using 239.192.1.4:8001 for one cluster and 239.192.1.3:7001 for
          the other - I think it's best to keep those as different as you can.
          In 8.1, there is also the multicast monitor utility - there's a support
          pattern on e-support on how to diagnose it. I've found this useful in
          the past when I've suspected a cluster issue.
          https://support.bea.com/application_content/product_portlets/support_patterns/wls/MulticastErrorsPattern.html
          Check also that you're using a valid range for the address - we weren't
          for a while and had odd problems from time to time.
          There are also cluster debug flags available which you'll see listed in
          the support document.
          Are you seeing dropped multicast packets?
          Hope that helps.
          Pete

Aging Report does not match Balance Sheet Receivables/Payables Account

Hi experts,
I am requesting your help to find out why our customer receivables/vendor payables aging reports total does not match our balance sheet accounts receivable/ accounts payable account for the same period.
I would expect
Customer Receivables Aging Report Total = Balance Sheet Accounts Receivables Account
Vendor Aging Report Total = Balance Sheet Accounts Payables Account
Thank you.
Jane

When you run the report with an ending/aging date in the past (like the end of last month), if you do not display BP's with zero balances, it will leave out BP's who have a zero balance AT THE TIME YOU RUN THE REPORT. Some of them may have had a non-zero balance at the end of the month, but they will be left off anyway. So if a customer owed money on the last day of the month and he paid it on the first of the next month, his balance will not be shown on the report if you run it even one day later.
I feel this is a design defect in the report, but it is the system behavior.
Marcia

Separate Work and personal CONTACTS (not BB Balance)

Is there an alternative way to have separate CONTACTS (work and personal) in a BB Z10 for us whom do not have BB Balance. I just want this for the contacts, and perhaps the text messages, I do not need the security and all other features that Balance or a BES provides... If not, do you guys know if BLACKBERRY is planning on doing this for a future update? Seems like a very useful feature...
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Open Contacts, at the bottom - All, Search, select 'New Group' create Group Name then add contacts.
Suggest you name them 1business and 1private etc., then the groups will be at the top of the list. Existing contacts will just be duplicated in Groups.

Business area wise Trail balance is not showing balance

Dear all ,
I am facing problem in f.08.
We have 5 company code ,8 Business area, We have Activated Business area wise Balance sheet in OBY6.and assigned Plant division and Valuation area .
I am activated document splitting, Here also i maintained Business area and Profit center is mandatory field.
when i saw the business area trial balance gl balance is not showing its giving error" no list generated."
Kindly suggest me what is the setting we missed.
Thanks and Advance.
Girish.

Hello,
I think, you did not set "Assign Scenarios and Customer Fields to Ledgers" customizing on SPRO.
Financial Accounting (New) -> Financial Accounting Global Settings (New) -> Ledgers -> Ledger -> Assign Scenarios and Customer Fields to Ledgers.
You must define FIN_GSBER to scenarios for ledger "0L".
Then system fills business area on table FAGLFLEXT.
But unfortunately can not correct older data.
Regards,
Burak

4KE5 not allocating Balance Sheet Accounts

We created a new cycle for 2011, when we run 4KE5 we noticed that only expense accounts are being allocated correctly but balance sheets are not being allocated for a specific profit center. This was working in 2010. These accounts are non-recon accounts. The only difference we are doing is that we are now running F.5D and 1KEK to transfer receivables to controlling.
The accounts that are not being allocated are in table 3KEH, so nothing change for them for 2011. When I run 4KE5 I don't get warnings or hard stop errors for this profit center. All other profit centers are allocating correctly except one the only message we get when we run 4KE5 for the profit center in question is GA171. The curious thing is that if the account is an expense account is allocating, but if it is a balance sheet acct it does not.
Has anyone experience this before?
Thanks,

Change account range in 3KE2. Since user created new cycle from the budget cycle the account range had changed.

CSM not load-balancing properly

Folks,
I'm seeing that CSM is not loadbalancing properly to all the servers in the serverfarm.
I simulated a failover of one of the servers TS05 and brought it back. After coming online, CSM sent no traffic to that server, as shown below:
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | i OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 4
TS03-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS04-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 4
TS05-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | i OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 3
TS03-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS04-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 3
TS05-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | i OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 4
TS03-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS04-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 3
TS05-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | i OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS03-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS04-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS05-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | i OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS03-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS04-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS05-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 3
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | i OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS03-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 1
TS04-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2
TS05-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 4
My config is attached with this post:
Can there be anything wrong with my VARIABLES?
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 variable | i SLOW
REAL_SLOW_START_ENABLE 1
C7606-1#

Folks - I upgraded the code to 4.2(6) and thought that bug CSCei26434 was solved, but still see the same error where CSM is not balancing properly.
No Traffic Running:
===================
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
Started Traffic
===============
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 60
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 101
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 188
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
The newly ALIVE server passed the probe test:
=============================================
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 probe detail | inc 102
192.168.122.102:1813 RADIUS RADIUS (default) OPERABLE
192.168.122.102:9202 WSP_SCL WSP_SCL (default) OPERABLE
192.168.122.102:9201 WSP_CO WSP_CO (default) OPERABLE
192.168.122.102:9200 WSP_CL WSP_CL (default) OPERABLE
192.168.122.102:8080 WHTTP WHTTP (default) OPERABLE
192.168.122.102:8080 TP_8080 TP_8080 (default) OPERABLE
192.168.122.102:7080 PUSH_WWW PUSH_WWW (default) OPERABLE
Still no connections:
=====================
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 583
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
C76061#
Brought another server on-line:
================================
C7606-1#
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: TCP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:8080 in serverfarm 'WHTTP'
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: TCP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:8080 in serverfarm 'TP_8080'
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: TCP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:7080 in serverfarm 'PUSH_WWW'
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: UDP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:9200 in serverfarm 'WSP_CL'
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: UDP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:1813 in serverfarm 'RADIUS'
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: UDP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:9201 in serverfarm 'WSP_CO'
C7606-1#
C7606-1#
1w4d: %CSM_SLB-6-RSERVERSTATE: Module 1 server state changed: SLB-NETMGT: UDP health probe re-activated server 192.168.122.106:9202 in serverfarm '
No connections to the NEW Server even
======================================
C7606-1#show mod csm 1 serverfarms name WHTTP detail | inc OPER
TS01-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 2988
TS02-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0
TS06-RADIO, weight = 8, OPERATIONAL, conns = 0

MR11 and FAGLL03 not in balance

Good Morning Gurus-
Should GR/IR account via MR11 be in balance to FAGGLL03 G/L GR/IR for the same period? What scenario would result these be different? We have a minor difference.
Thank you.

I tried to run ASKB and found this error.
"When creating the accounting document, the system could not find account 'Capital. difference/Non-operatng expense' in depreciation area 35 for company code xx19. "
Depreciation area 35 is our delta dep area and I am trying to add the value to existing asset. It worked in Asset ledger but not reflected in GL.
Can some give me lead how to fix this error ?
Thanks
Satya

Clustering not Load balancing on solaris with apache

apache weblogic plugin does not do round-robin , it's kind of random when
          direct the request to the appserver. anyone has seen this problem?
          weblogic5.1 sp9. solaris 2.7 jre1.3.1 rc2


Actually, the random load-balancing when using Apache is caused by the fact
          that Apache (<2.0) spawns multiple processes, so single Apache instance
          will have several plug-in instances running.
          Mike Reiche <[email protected]> wrote:
          > You are using the weblogic plug-in, aren't you?
          > Only new requests are round-robinned. A second request from the same browser
          > is sent to the same server it hit the first time (sticky load-balancing).
          > Mike
          > "Tony Lu" <[email protected]> wrote:
          >>apache weblogic plugin does not do round-robin , it's kind of random
          >>when
          >>direct the request to the appserver. anyone has seen this problem?
          >>
          >>weblogic5.1 sp9. solaris 2.7 jre1.3.1 rc2
          >>
          >>
          Dimitri

BizTalk 2010 Load Balancing Not So Balanced

Ok here's our scenario.
1. One Orchestration running under HostInstanceProcess on 3 servers in the same Groupe using 3 different domain accounts
2. That Orchestration has a reference to Utilities dll, which in turns calls a stored procedure using ADO.net code
3. We run that orchestration, it gets around 2000 de-batched messages and for those 2000 messages it calls that ADO.net code
4. Back in that database we run sp_who to check how many connections are made from each machine, and we find that over 60% connections are always made from one particular BizTalk machine and it's not one off, I've seen it atleast 7 to 8 times, that machine
always has most number of connections, for example if there are 120 connections in total, 80 connections are from Server 1 while rest from others.
5. We put a Max Pool connections in the connection string to 250 (default is 100) but that doesn't make any difference.
6. This interface is facing a lot of connection time outs from the database, hence this investigation is done
7. The same interface works perfectly fine on BizTalk 2006 R2, it's connecting to the same database (so can't be a database issue), it has 2 servers, which make almost same number of connections to the DB when I check with sp_who, so load balancing seems
to working as expected in BizTalk 2006 R2.
So my question, I know BizTalk is supposed to do load balancing in a round robin fashion which should equally distribute the load but in my example in BizTalk 2010, it's not doing that clearly, it's overloading one server with almost 70% of the requests,
what could be the reason for this? Host instances are set-up similarly in all servers. Any help greatly appreciated.
Regards
Syed

BizTalk load balancing works in Round Robin fashion only for the new messages, while in case of instance subscription message will be routed to server holding dehydrated orchestration instance.
So the server having dehydrated instances will receive the correlated response along with the new incoming message.
So you can see one server slightly overloaded.
Thanks,
Prashant
Please mark this post accordingly if it answers your query or is helpful.

Load Balancing not load balancing!

Hi,
We have inherited a 6.3 2005 Q1 installation of Access Manager that has the following problem.
All logons appear to be load balanced correctly however all Policy Agent requests are expressing a preference for one or other node at a time.
For example, during the last 4 days all PA traffic has been hitting Srv01. This leads to an 80/20 balance. This morning on Srv01 an error in the amSession logs appeared on Srv01, "SessionRequestHandler NullPointerException" and from this point on Srv02 started to take the Policy Agent requests. So now the traffic is still 80/20 but wth Srv02 handling the 'lion's share'.
Can anyone point me to documentation that describes in detail how Load Balancing working in the products?
Thanks,
EddieT

Hi,
Sorry I should have been more specific. The error we are seeing has been reported before but no resolution posted.
Thanks.
29/05/2009 08:57:05:119 AM IST: Thread[service-j2ee,11,main]
ERROR: SessionRequestHandler encounterd exception
com.iplanet.sso.SSOException: Session was not obtained.
at com.iplanet.sso.providers.dpro.SSOProviderImpl.createSSOToken(SSOProviderImpl.java:177)
at com.iplanet.sso.SSOTokenManager.createSSOToken(SSOTokenManager.java:305)
at com.sun.identity.session.util.RestrictedTokenContext.unmarshal(RestrictedTokenContext.java:125)
at com.iplanet.dpro.session.service.SessionRequestHandler.processRequest(SessionRequestHandler.java:139)
at com.iplanet.dpro.session.service.SessionRequestHandler.process(SessionRequestHandler.java:112)
at com.iplanet.services.comm.server.PLLRequestServlet.handleRequest(PLLRequestServlet.java:195)
at com.iplanet.services.comm.server.PLLRequestServlet.doPost(PLLRequestServlet.java:147)
at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:767)
at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:860)
at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor203.invoke(Unknown Source)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil$1.run(SecurityUtil.java:249)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at javax.security.auth.Subject.doAsPrivileged(Subject.java:517)
at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil.execute(SecurityUtil.java:282)
at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil.doAsPrivilege(SecurityUtil.java:165)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:257)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.access$000(ApplicationFilterChain.java:55)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain$1.run(ApplicationFilterChain.java:161)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:157)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke(StandardWrapperValve.java:263)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:551)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invokeInternal(StandardContextValve.java:225)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke(StandardContextValve.java:173)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:551)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke(StandardHostValve.java:170)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:551)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:933)
at com.sun.enterprise.web.connector.httpservice.HttpServiceProcessor.process(HttpServiceProcessor.java:234)
at com.sun.enterprise.web.HttpServiceWebContainer.service(HttpServiceWebContainer.java:2124)

Workload seemes not be balanced acoss 2 nodes

Hi All,
My DB is 11.1.
We have a sevice named daily_batch and we have assgined 2 nodes(node1 and node2) to this sevice.
And in client tns,both load_balance and fail_over are set to on or yes.
The application has run for years with no obvious problems. But when reading awr reports for node1 and 2 within the same period, I have found that node2 always has less workload than node1.
Can someone tell me how to check awr report to verify that the workload has been balanced across these 2 nodes,　please?
Best regards,
Leon

user12064076 wrote:
The difference is too much.And yes, there may be some other SQLs running on node 1. But shouldn't Oracle balance the workload more actively in this case?That depends on the method used to load balance. Are you using the Listener and a load balance TNS connection request? Or are these database jobs that are scheduled without "instance affinity"? Are you using database services?
Also - does a performance problem or bottleneck result with the current load balancing you are observing?
Since most of the SQLs are executed in parallel in our batch, I suspect the PGA will be more essential than SGA.And in my opinion, PGA can't be shared across nodes like SGA (no cache fusion for PGA). So I think it's more crucial for Oracle to distribute the sessions evenly.SQL statements do not use PGA - unless they are run from PL/SQL code and that code does a lot of cursor row fetching (pulling data from the SGA into the PGA).
What's your opinion?That we're going to loose against the All Blacks this weekend and that the couch should have been fired last year already. (well, you did ask! ;-) )

F.13 (SAPF124) not clearning balances

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for