HFM Performance Issue

I have a client experiencing slow performance when running consolidation. It has approx. 200 entites and has wuite a flat structure.
I read somewhere that MaxNumCubesInRAM and MaxNumDataRecordsInRAM will affect performance and they can be tunned. May I knw where can I find these 2 information for my application?
Any other idea for performance tuning, eg number of cpu recommended?
Thanks!

use windows 64 bit
from DBAG :
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Hyperion Solutions\Hyperion Financial Management\Server.
•     NumMinutesBeforeCheckingLRU - This parameter determines how long in minutes the system waits before checking RAM utilization.
•     NumCubesLoadedBeforeCheckingLRU 500 - This parameter determines how many sub-cubes should be loaded before checking RAM utilization.
•     MaxNumCubesInRAM - This parameter determines the maximum number of sub-cubes allowed in RAM. Applications with very sparse data sets (i.e. small sub-cubes) may benefit from higher settings.
•     MaxNumDataRecordsInRAM - This parameter determines the maximum number of data records allowed in RAM. Applications with very sparse data sets (i.e. small sub-cubes) may benefit from higher settings.
•     MultiThreadCalcStatus – Hyperion does not recommend changing this setting.
•     NumConsolidationThreads - This setting controls the multi-threading of consolidations. Lowering the value limits the system’s utilization of system resources resulting in slower consolidation performance. The minimum value is 1 and the maximum is 8.
•     NumVBScriptEngines - See NumConsolidationThreads description. Same limits apply.
•     MaxNumConcurrentConsolidations – This setting can be used to limit the number of allowed concurrent consolidations. Any consolidations executed above the value are queued. The minimum value is 1 and the maximum is 8.
•     EnableRulesCaching – Hyperion does not recommend changing this setting.

Similar Messages

HFM Security Issue - User can submit a journal by by-passing the approval step even though they are not an admin.

Hi All,
I was wondering if anyone could help me with a HFM security issue on HFM 11.1.2.3 we are facing please?
The problem is that a user can by-pass the journal approval stage and post directly after submitting if Custom4 access control=All is selected.
If any of the other access controls (None, Read, Promote) for custom 4 are selected, the first two steps of the process are possible -
input and approval of the journal are possible but final posting of the journal is not and returns an error that says:
"User does not have the access right to perform this journal task"
The options I have thought for a workaround are as follows:
1.       1. Set up a 3rd user called data poster and remove submit journal role from user 1 (data inputter)
2.       2. Put in place process control and use the various review levels (could be quite time consuming given there is no time left for development)
Have anyone experienced this before and come up with a quick way of resolving this please? It would be very much appreciated.
We have two types of users who are associated with groups in HFM and have the appropriate roles assigned to them to complete their tasks,
they are:
1. A data Inputter (who inputs base data and journals, who has access to create and submit journals)
2.   2. A data reviewer (who approves journals)
The process is as follows:
1.       1. Logon as Data inputter to submit the journals
2.       2. Logon as Data reviewer to approve the journals
3.       3. Logon as Data inputter to post the Journals
We are using the custom 4 member to identify different adjustment types. At the moment we are able to set it up in such a way whereby Steps 1 and 2 can be completed
but once it comes back to step 3, we get an error as follows:
"User does not have the access right to perform this journal task"
(This error comes about when the access control on custom 4 is set to None, Read, Promote)
Custom 4 Access Rights looks as follows:
C4_ADJ01
C4_ADJ02
C4_ADJ03
C4_ADJ04
HFMDefault
Read
Read
Read
Read
HFMLoad
All
Promote
None
Read
HFMReview
Read
All
All
All
When Custom 4=C4_ADJ01 all 3 steps can be completed but it by-passes step 2 (journal approval).
For all other Custom 4 we complete steps 1 and 2 successfully but not step 3 due to access issues.
Roles for the groups that users assigned look like the following:
Test User Name
Test User Name
Access Rights
1
Base Data input/Journal Data input
test_HFMLoad
Reviewer 1
Review Supervisor
Create Journals
Read Journals
Database Management
Enable write back in Web Grid
Load Excel Data
Generate Recurring
Post Journals
Create Unbalanced Journals
Manage Templates
Data Form Write Back from Excel
Consolidate
2
Data Reviewer
test_HFMReview
Reviewer 1
Review Supervisor
Create Journals
Read Journals
Database Management
Approve Journals
Consolidate
Reviewer 2
Generate Recurring
Manage Templates
Create Unbalanced Journals
Any help or advice would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
M.

Hi All,
I was wondering if anyone could help me with a HFM security issue on HFM 11.1.2.3 we are facing please?
The problem is that a user can by-pass the journal approval stage and post directly after submitting if Custom4 access control=All is selected.
If any of the other access controls (None, Read, Promote) for custom 4 are selected, the first two steps of the process are possible -
input and approval of the journal are possible but final posting of the journal is not and returns an error that says:
"User does not have the access right to perform this journal task"
The options I have thought for a workaround are as follows:
1.       1. Set up a 3rd user called data poster and remove submit journal role from user 1 (data inputter)
2.       2. Put in place process control and use the various review levels (could be quite time consuming given there is no time left for development)
Have anyone experienced this before and come up with a quick way of resolving this please? It would be very much appreciated.
We have two types of users who are associated with groups in HFM and have the appropriate roles assigned to them to complete their tasks,
they are:
1. A data Inputter (who inputs base data and journals, who has access to create and submit journals)
2.   2. A data reviewer (who approves journals)
The process is as follows:
1.       1. Logon as Data inputter to submit the journals
2.       2. Logon as Data reviewer to approve the journals
3.       3. Logon as Data inputter to post the Journals
We are using the custom 4 member to identify different adjustment types. At the moment we are able to set it up in such a way whereby Steps 1 and 2 can be completed
but once it comes back to step 3, we get an error as follows:
"User does not have the access right to perform this journal task"
(This error comes about when the access control on custom 4 is set to None, Read, Promote)
Custom 4 Access Rights looks as follows:
C4_ADJ01
C4_ADJ02
C4_ADJ03
C4_ADJ04
HFMDefault
Read
Read
Read
Read
HFMLoad
All
Promote
None
Read
HFMReview
Read
All
All
All
When Custom 4=C4_ADJ01 all 3 steps can be completed but it by-passes step 2 (journal approval).
For all other Custom 4 we complete steps 1 and 2 successfully but not step 3 due to access issues.
Roles for the groups that users assigned look like the following:
Test User Name
Test User Name
Access Rights
1
Base Data input/Journal Data input
test_HFMLoad
Reviewer 1
Review Supervisor
Create Journals
Read Journals
Database Management
Enable write back in Web Grid
Load Excel Data
Generate Recurring
Post Journals
Create Unbalanced Journals
Manage Templates
Data Form Write Back from Excel
Consolidate
2
Data Reviewer
test_HFMReview
Reviewer 1
Review Supervisor
Create Journals
Read Journals
Database Management
Approve Journals
Consolidate
Reviewer 2
Generate Recurring
Manage Templates
Create Unbalanced Journals
Any help or advice would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
M.

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 in correlation with hidden objects in reports

Hello,
is there a known performance issue in correlation with hidden objects in reports using conditional suppressions? (HFM version 11.1.2.1)
Using comprehensive reports, we have huge performance differences between the same reports with and without hidden objects. Furthermore we suspect that some trouble with our reporting server environment base on using these reports through enduser.
Every advice would be welcome!
Regards,
bsc
Edited by: 972676 on Nov 22, 2012 11:27 AM

If you said that working with EVDRE for each separate sheet is fin ethat's means the main problem it is related to your VB custom macro interdependecy.
I suggest to add a log (to write into a text file)for you Macro and you will se that actually that minute is staying to perform operations from custom Macro.
Kind Regards
Sorin Radulescu

Upgrade to Hyperion Enterprise 6.5.1.1.102 - Performance Issues

We are testing an upgrade to Hyperion Enterprise 6.5.1.1. We have applied the Update 2 patch which I believe officially takes the version to 6.5.1.1.102. In testing reports and consolidation between the new version and the old 6.4.1 version of Enterprise, we are seeing a delay in how long it take reports to generate and for Consolidation to complete. With reports, we see the delay specifically when running large reports that pull a lot of data.
Currently, our 6.4.1 Hyperion application is installed on a Win2003 server and our users access Hyperion via Citrix. The 6.5.1.1.102 version is installed on a Win2008 server and is being accessed through Citrix.
To isolate this issue, we loaded Hyperion locally on a server and the timed some reports. The 6.5 reports take just as long to run as on our current v6.4 platform. So, it appears there is a performance issue running 6.5 enterprise through Citrix. Has any one else experienced this type problem or have any suggestions. We have been referred to numerous performance tuning notes from Hyperion support but nothing seems help.
Thanks.

Hi,
I would suggest you to apply the latest patch 6.5.1.1.103, and I would strongly recommend you to upgrade to HFM.
Hyperion Enterprise and Hyperion Enterprise Reporting Statement of Direction (Doc ID 1396504.1)
Hope this helps,
Thank you,
Charles Babu J

Workspace login performance issues

Hi folks,
Thousand of users are using my fm application and they are hitting servers by smart view,workspace..once it's reach peak stage my server was getting hung and we were impliment no.of performnce tunning ( Vertical clustering,cahing,compression,hfm performcne tunning,reg setting )..we appiled performnce tunning all possible ways ..still we are facing performance issues..
we are using 11.1.1.3 version..can anybody suggest me whta i need to do apart above changes..

Hi Denis,
To add on to the query, Basis have applied patch around two days back. As the thread you specified, member who was seeking the solution has not mentioned if the notes helped him finally. I think increasing the memory cache size might help. Also, the time taken to load the home page is irrespective of the load on the server, it takes same amount of time at off peak hours.
Regards,
Chitwanjit

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

Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

Thanks Kelly,
The answers would be the following:
1200 cells per custom section (NEW COUNT), and up to 30 custom sections per spec.
Assuming all will be populated, and this would apply to all final material specs in the system which could be ~25% of all material specs.
The cells will be numeric, free text, drop downs, and some calculated numeric.
Are we reaching the limits for UI performance?
Thanks

IOS 8.1+ Performance Issue

Hello,
I encountered a serious performance bug in Adobe Air iOS application on devices running iOS 8.1 or later. Approximately in 1-2 minutes fps drops to 7 or lower without interacting with the app. This is very noticeable in the app. The app looks like frozen for about 0.5 seconds. The bug doesn't appear on every session.
Devices tested: iPad Mini iOS 8.1.1, iPhone 6 iOS 8.2. iPod Touch 4 iOS 6 is working correctly.
Air SDK versions: 15 and 17 tested.
I can track the bug using Adobe Scout. There is a noticeable spike on frame time 1.16. Framerate drops to 7.0. The App spends much time on function Runtime overhead. Sometimes the top activity is Running AS3 attached to frame or Waiting For Next Frame instead of Runtime overhead.
The bug can be reproduced on an empty application having a one bitmap on stage. Open the app and wait for two minutes and the bug should appear. If not, just close and relaunch the app.
Bugbase link: Bug#3965160 - iOS 8.1+ Performance Issue
Miska Savela

Hi
Id already activated Messages and entered the 6 digit code I was presented with into my iPhone. I can receive txt messages from non iOS users on my iMac and can reply to those messages.
I just can't send a new message from scratch to a non iOS user :-s
Thanks
Baz

Returning multiple values from a called tabular form(performance issue)

I hope someone can help with this.
I have a form that calls another form to display a multiple column tabular list of values(needs to allow for user sorting so could not use a LOV).
The user selects one or more records from the list by using check boxes. In order to detect the records selected I loop through the block looking for boxes checked off and return those records to the calling form via a PL/SQL table.
The form displaying the tabular list loads quickly(about 5000 records in the base table). However when I select one or more values from the table and return back to the calling form, it takes a while(about 3-4 minutes) to return to the called form with the selected values.
I guess it is going through the block(all 5000 records) looking for boxes checked off and that is what is causing the noticeable pause.
Is this normal given the data volumes I have or are there any other perhaps better techniques or tricks I could use to improve performance. I am using Forms6i.
Sorry for being so long-winded and thanks in advance for any help.

Try writing to your PL/SQL table when the user selects (or remove when deselect) by usuing a when-checkbox-changed trigger. This will eliminate the need for you top loop through a block with 5000 records and should improve your performance.
I am not aware of any performance issues with PL/SQL tables in forms, but if you still have slow performance try using a shared record-group instead. I have used these in the past for exactly the same thing and had no performance problems.
Hope this helps,
Candace Stover
Forms Product Management

HFM Performance Issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for