Performance Discovere VS BI EE

Hi all,
we are currently use 10g Discoverer for our datawarehouse reporting. If we run the same reports in BI EE but I feel response time of the report is slow as compare to discoverer...any idea why ? and how I improve it ?
Regards

One easier way is to copy the sql produced in discoverer and create a physical table which would use that sql (select) in the Admin tool. Then create dummy BM and Presentation layer. You can create dimensions and then have drills set on them. That way its easier to create the reports. But if you have huge sets of reports, you need to start designing the repository so that you can create those reports in BI EE. Remember the equivalent tool for Discoverer is BI Answers and BI Publisher is for creating highly formatted reports(not a adhoc reporting tool).
Thanks,
Venkat
http://oraclebizint.wordpress.com

Similar Messages

No rows returned in the BIS views

I am new to Discoverer. I had connected to Financials Intelligence responsibility using discoverer desktop. When I tried to create a workbook in General Ledger Business Area to display the GL accounts, I get no rows returned message. I get the same message for any kind of report I try to create not only in GL business area but also in any of the seeded business areas provided by the Oracle. I can query it in toad and see the data but it is not retrieved in discoverer. what could be the problem? is there any profile options to be setup for my username or am I missing something?
Any help is greatly appreciated
Thanks

Here's the metalink note for those interested.
It's basically laying out all the steps to setup the info in Oracle Apps as alluded to by Simon and then perform a complete refresh of the BIS views in the database, bring in the new .eex file for changes, etc.
Russ
===========================================================
Applies to: Oracle Discoverer - Version: 10.1.2.48.18
This problem can occur on any platform.
Oracle Applications 11.5.10.2
Oracle Applications Concurrent Manager SymptomsUnable to retrieve any data on standard General Ledger (GL) business areas and standard workbooks after migrating the EUL from Discoverer 4.1 to 10.1.2 and upgrading Oracle Applications to 11.5.10.2.
These same workbooks and business areas worked fine before the upgrade to Discoverer 10.1.2.
A custom business area and custom workbooks return data, but none of the standard pre-seeded "BIS" or "Financials Intelligence General Ledger (GL) business areas return data when testing in Discoverer Plus, Viewer or Desktop.
ChangesMigrated the Discoverer EUL and Oracle Application Server environment from Discoverer 4.1.48.08 to 10.1.2.48.18. CauseIncomplete setup of Oracle E-Business Suite and Discoverer environment for Business Intelligence (BIS) and/or Financials Intelligence, including missing profile options for Oracle Applications Administrator and custom Super User responsibility.
SolutionTo implement the solution, please execute the following steps:
1. Login to Oracle Applications Systems Administration function as SYSADMIN user and set the profile option as described below:
a. Profile > System
b. Check the 'Site', 'Responsibility' and 'Profiles with No Values' checkboxes
c. Enter "Applications Administration' in 'Responsibility' field
d. Enter FII: GL BIS Discoverer access (if it does not display the profile option, please try wildcard option "FII%GL%BIS%" )
e. Then in the next screen, select 'Yes' from LOV under 'Site' and 'Responsibility' column
f. Save the settings
g. Again repeat the same steps for custom responsibility "My_Company General Ledger Super User"
2. Complete/confirm the following steps from Note 313418.1, Section 6, Post Installation Tasks
a) Step 4. Regenerate your Business Views - done throughNote 313418.1, Section 6, Post Installation Tasks
a) Step 4. Regenerate your Business Views - done through Oracle Applications Concurrent Manager as SYSADMIN user with the "Business Views Setup" responsibility.
b) Recommend all steps under 4 and steps under 5
c) Step 8. Refresh the Discoverer 10.1.2 End User Layer - via SYSADMIN user/responsibility - as described in note
d) Step 9 -> Need to make sure Applications Administrator responsibility has all
security and access to the EUL and business areas. Be sure to grant to responsibility
rather than SYSADMIN user since the "Applications Administrator" responsibility is used to perform Discoverer Administration tasks.
$ORACLE_HOME/bin/eulapi \
-CONNECT <EUL schema>/<password>@<db> \
-GRANT_PRIVILEGE \
-ROLE "Applications Administrator" \
-PRIVILEGE all_admin_privs
$ORACLE_HOME/bin/eulapi \
-CONNECT <EUL schema>/<password>@<db> \
-GRANT_PRIVILEGE \
-ROLE "Applications Administrator" \
-PRIVILEGE all_user_privs
AND
$ORACLE_HOME/bin/eulapi \
-CONNECT <EUL schema>/<password>@<db> \
-GRANT_PRIVILEGE \
- ROLE "Applications Administrator" \
-BUSINESS_AREA_ADMIN_ACCESS % \
-WILDCARD \
-LOG <log file name>
Note: The above commands need to be in one continuous line. For Unix/Linux, you may separate lines with continuation character "\"
3. Once all steps have been completed, the standard General Ledger (GL) workbooks and newly created workbooks based on standard GL usiness areas will return data.
Note: If you are unsure if you are encountering this specific issue, it is always beneficial to test the data via SQL using the same Oracle E-Business Suite user and responsibility.
The following reference will guide you how to accomplish this:
Note 279736.1 'How To Run SQL From An Apps Mode Discoverer Workbook In SQL*PLUS'
ReferencesNote 313418.1 - Using Discoverer 10.1.2 with Oracle E-Business Suite 11i
Note 279736.1 - How To Run SQL From An Apps Mode Discoverer Workbook In SQL*PLUS
Keywords'BUSINESS~AREA' 'PROFILES-SYSTEM' 'FII~~GL~BIS~DISCOVERER~ACCESS' 'DISCOVERER~4.1.48.08' 'BUSINESS~VIEWS' 'UPGRADE~TO~11.5.10.2' 'PROFILES-SYSTEM' 'UPGRADE~TO~10.1.2'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EUL on Replication Server May Not Match Production EUL

Hello:First let me thank you for the rapid response on the "Replication Impact on the EUL" issue. This is a follow on to that initial question. I intend to perform Discoverer administrative tasks on the replication server EUL. The tasks will involve creation of new business areas and their customization including the sharing of some reference folders in existing schemas with the new business areas.
1. Should the replication process be "quieted" i.e. halted during the administrative processes?
2. Are the changes to the replication database EUL required to be made to the production database EUL as well?
3. Will the replication process adversely affect a changed EUL on the replication server database?

You are just confusing those who did not see that thread and they will not know how to follow up on it.
Why not continue it on that thread or show the URL
Replication Impact on EUL

Performance issues when creating a Report / Query in Discoverer

Hi forum,
Hope you are can help, it involves a performance issues when creating a Report / Query.
I have a Discoverer Report that currently takes less than 5 seconds to run. After I add a condition to bring back Batch Status that = Posted we cancelled the query after reaching 20 minutes as this is way too long. If I remove the condition the query time goes back to less than 5 seconds.
Please see attached the SQL Inspector Plan:
Before Condition
SELECT STATEMENT
SORT GROUP BY
VIEW SYS
SORT GROUP BY
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS
AND-EQUAL
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS_N2
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS_N1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES
INDEX RANGE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES_N1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUE_SETS
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUE_SETS_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES_TL
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES_TL_U1
INDEX RANGE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUE_NORM_HIER_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_LINES
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_JE_LINES_N1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_SETS_OF_BOOKS_U2
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_HEADERS
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_DAILY_CONVERSION_TYPES_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_SOURCES_TL
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_SOURCES_TL_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_CATEGORIES_TL_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_BATCHES_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_BUDGET_VERSIONS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_ENCUMBRANCE_TYPES_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_SETS_OF_BOOKS_U2
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_BATCHES
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_BATCHES_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_SETS_OF_BOOKS_U2
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_BATCHES_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_PERIODS
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_PERIODS_U1
After Condition
SELECT STATEMENT
SORT GROUP BY
VIEW SYS
SORT GROUP BY
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS
NESTED LOOPS OUTER
NESTED LOOPS
TABLE ACCESS FULL GL.GL_JE_BATCHES
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_SETS_OF_BOOKS_U2
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_BATCHES_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_HEADERS
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_N1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_SETS_OF_BOOKS_U2
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_ENCUMBRANCE_TYPES_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_DAILY_CONVERSION_TYPES_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_BUDGET_VERSIONS_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_SOURCES_TL
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_SOURCES_TL_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_CATEGORIES_TL_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_BATCHES_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_JE_LINES
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_JE_LINES_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_SETS_OF_BOOKS_U2
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID GL.GL_PERIODS
INDEX RANGE SCAN GL.GL_PERIODS_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES
INDEX RANGE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES_N1
INDEX RANGE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUE_NORM_HIER_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES_TL
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUES_TL_U1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUE_SETS
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN APPLSYS.FND_FLEX_VALUE_SETS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1
Is there anything i can do in Discoverer Desktop / Administration to avoid this problem.
Many thanks,
Lance

Hi Rod,
I've tried the condition (Batch Status||'' = 'Posted') as you suggested, but the qeury time is still over 20 mins. To test i changed it to (Batch Status||'' = 'Unposted') and the query was returned within seconds again.
Ive been doing some more digging and have found the database view that is linked to the Journal Batches folder. See below.
I think the problem is with the column using DECODE. When querying the column in TOAD the value of P is returned. But in discoverer the condition is done on the value Posted. Im not too sure how DECODE works, but think this could be the causing some sort of issue with Full Table Scans. How do we get around this?
Lance
DECODE( JOURNAL_BATCH1.STATUS,
'+', 'Unable to validate or create CTA',
'+*', 'Was unable to validate or create CTA',
'-','Invalid or inactive rounding differences account in journal entry',
'-*', 'Modified invalid or inactive rounding differences account in journal entry',
'<', 'Showing sequence assignment failure',
'<*', 'Was showing sequence assignment failure',
'>', 'Showing cutoff rule violation',
'>*', 'Was showing cutoff rule violation',
'A', 'Journal batch failed funds reservation',
'A*', 'Journal batch previously failed funds reservation',
'AU', 'Showing batch with unopened period',
'B', 'Showing batch control total violation',
'B*', 'Was showing batch control total violation',
'BF', 'Showing batch with frozen or inactive budget',
'BU', 'Showing batch with unopened budget year',
'C', 'Showing unopened reporting period',
'C*', 'Was showing unopened reporting period',
'D', 'Selected for posting to an unopened period',
'D*', 'Was selected for posting to an unopened period',
'E', 'Showing no journal entries for this batch',
'E*', 'Was showing no journal entries for this batch',
'EU', 'Showing batch with unopened encumbrance year',
'F', 'Showing unopened reporting encumbrance year',
'F*', 'Was showing unopened reporting encumbrance year',
'G', 'Showing journal entry with invalid or inactive suspense account',
'G*', 'Was showing journal entry with invalid or inactive suspense account',
'H', 'Showing encumbrance journal entry with invalid or inactive reserve account',
'H*', 'Was showing encumbrance journal entry with invalid or inactive reserve account',
'I', 'In the process of being posted',
'J', 'Showing journal control total violation',
'J*', 'Was showing journal control total violation',
'K', 'Showing unbalanced intercompany journal entry',
'K*', 'Was showing unbalanced intercompany journal entry',
'L', 'Showing unbalanced journal entry by account category',
'L*', 'Was showing unbalanced journal entry by account category',
'M', 'Showing multiple problems preventing posting of batch',
'M*', 'Was showing multiple problems preventing posting of batch',
'N', 'Journal produced error during intercompany balance processing',
'N*', 'Journal produced error during intercompany balance processing',
'O', 'Unable to convert amounts into reporting currency',
'O*', 'Was unable to convert amounts into reporting currency',
'P', 'Posted',
'Q', 'Showing untaxed journal entry',
'Q*', 'Was showing untaxed journal entry',
'R', 'Showing unbalanced encumbrance entry without reserve account',
'R*', 'Was showing unbalanced encumbrance entry without reserve account',
'S', 'Already selected for posting',
'T', 'Showing invalid period and conversion information for this batch',
'T*', 'Was showing invalid period and conversion information for this batch',
'U', 'Unposted',
'V', 'Journal batch is unapproved',
'V*', 'Journal batch was unapproved',
'W', 'Showing an encumbrance journal entry with no encumbrance type',
'W*', 'Was showing an encumbrance journal entry with no encumbrance type',
'X', 'Showing an unbalanced journal entry but suspense not allowed',
'X*', 'Was showing an unbalanced journal entry but suspense not allowed',
'Z', 'Showing invalid journal entry lines or no journal entry lines',
'Z*', 'Was showing invalid journal entry lines or no journal entry lines', NULL ),

Slow performance of discoverer portlets

Hi,
I am running into slow performance of a particular page in portal, there are multiple sites hosted on the portal but these all have static text and are very quick to load but the one page with discoverer portlets and a web-clippping portlet is taking ages. If I run these reports on their own they are instant. Has anyone had similar problems with 9.0.2 portal and the discoverer reports ? I tried to identify a particular report that may be the culprit by deleting them one by one and to no avail. After a few hours effort I found the design mode was hanging as well. Again, just for this 1 page.
There are 3 tabs on this page with about 4 report portlets and 1 web-clipping portlet.
Thanks for any help,
Brandon

Thanks for the help.
Seems to have been resolved although I'm not sure if thats the end of the story. Will wait and see.....
So far apparently a port conflict of some sort in the discoverer config was causing it to hang and then also other system demands on the network and server housing the discoverer end-user layer were also causing problems.
No error messages unfortunately......

Database migrated from Oracle 10g to 11g Discoverer report performance issu

Hi All,
We are now getting issue in Discoverer Report performance as the report is keep on running when database got upgrade from 10g to 11g.
In database 10g the report is working fine but the same report is not working fine in 11g.
The query i have changed as I have passed the date format TO_CHAR("DD-MON-YYYY" and removed the NVL & TRUNC function from the existing query.
The report is now working fine in Database 11g backhand but when I am using the same query in Discoverer it is not working and report is keep on running.
Please advise.
Regards,

Pl post exact OS, database and Discoverer versions. After the upgrade, have statistics been updated ? Have you traced the Discoverer query to determine where the performance issue is ?
How To Find Oracle Discoverer Diagnostic and Tracing Guides [ID 290658.1]
How To Enable SQL Tracing For Discoverer Sessions [ID 133055.1]
Discoverer 11g: Performance degradation after Upgrade to Database 11g [ID 1514929.1]
HTH
Srini

Performance when executing query on 9iAS Discoverer Plus 1.0.2.2

Hi, anybody knows when there's information about Discoverer Plus configuration (9iAS release 1) to get a good performance? Because, when I run queries, the response time is not good enough.
I have configured the pref.txt file based on the advises of "Oracle 9iAS Discoverer: Best Practices for Release 1.0.2.2 (Discoverer 4i Version 4.1.42x and later)" paper, but without the expected results. Does exist another document about that?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Pablo Ibarra.

Hi,
I'm a Pablo´s partner, he is on vacation now and is very sorried about not answering this forum. In particular, we need documentation about the improvement of running Discoverer queries on 9iAS, may be through configurations on the web server.
We have tunned the queries on client/server, and they run on expected response times, do you know if there's a document "9iAS Discoverer Tunning"?, or something like that?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Adrian.

Poor performance on Discoverer after upgrade to 11g database

Hello,
We have two customers who have experienced a sharp decline in the time it takes to run their queries when they have upgraded to an 11g database.
One was a full Disco upgrade from 4 to 10 plus the database upgrade.
The other was purely a database upgrade - Discoverer version was already 10g.
They were both on 9i database.
They are both Oracle Apps - and the reports are based on a mixture of everything from standard tables to custom tables - there is no pattern (or one that we have seen) in the poorly performing reports.
I have not seen much on metalink regarding this - has anyone else come across why this would be?
It does seem to be only Discoverer - standard reports and the app are performing as expected.
Any advice welcome,
Thanks
Rachael

Hi Rachael
There are additional database privileges needed for running in 10g and 11g databases that weren't needed in 9i. Here's the typical privileges that I use:
accept username prompt'Enter Username: '
accept pword prompt'Enter Password: '
create user &username identified by &pword;
grant connect, resource to &username;
grant analyze any to &username;
grant create procedure, create sequence to &username;
grant create session, create table, create view to &username;
grant execute any procedure to &username;
grant global query rewrite to &username;
grant create any materialized view to &username;
grant drop any materialized view to &username;
grant alter any materialized view to &username;
grant select any table, unlimited tablespace to &username;
grant execute on sys.dbms_job to &username;
grant select on sys.v_$parameter to &username;
I appreciate that all of the above are not needed for all users and some are only needed if the user is going to be scheduling.
However, I do know that sys.v_$parameter was not needed in 9i. Can you check whether you have this assigned?
I know this might sound silly too, but you need to refresh your database statistics in order for Discoverer to work well. You might also want to try turning off the query predictor if it is still enabled.
Best wishes
Michael

Please help, Discoverer Performance.

I am having problems with report performance in Discoverer. I believe I have set up the Business Area correctly. I am having a problem when adding a drop down menu to a report in that it takes a long time. Is there anything I can do? (It takes about 5 seconds to refresh a report without any drill filters on top, and with 5 drill filters on top it takes about 4 minutes.)
Also, I copied and pasted the sql querry into sql developer from the report, and the report took less than 5 seconds. This tells me there is something set up on the report side that is incorrect. Any suggestions?
Thanks!

1. This is a 10G Plus Olap situation.
2. Yes, the dims are set up linked to the larger fact table.
3. I have tried re-arranging the group items without anything else on the group level. If there is only one group by (on the dropdown) such as state, it is really quick (less than 2 seconds to refresh), even with the Customer Dim (with 7k + names). However, when I put more than one group by on the drill down, everything is exponentially slowed down.
4. This definitely doesn't work.
6. Unfortunately, the table design isnt as simple as I have defined it to be. There are probably 20 measures involved, along with about 30+ parameters. I do have Toad and SQL Developer, and can create a view for each particular group by, because that is faster, but I run into 2 problems.
A. The data is refreshed and broken down to a weekly basis which would create an incredible runtime for the number of views I would need to write
B. This is only one Business area in an end user layer of about 15. This problem spans across the other business areas as well.
7. Taking the sql right out of the report, and crunching the report in developer produces timely results, regardless of what kind of group by statements are included.(although the view sql doesn't include the group by statements)
8. One thing I really don't get: This is a work around I have figured out, but the end users probably won't want to deal with this:
1. I set up the customer name as a parameter (so when the report is refreshed, the end user can select one or more names before refreshing reports)
2. I put all of the other group bys/ drop downs into the report (4 of them).
The result is the report works with lightning speed. The drawbacks are the end user can't scroll through the names as easily and it creates more steps for the end user.
If I can get it to work efficiently by creating a parameter, why can't I have a drop down? It seems that they are pretty much the same thing?
Thanks Russ.
Message was edited by:
user519817

Performance for Custom folder in Discoverer

Hi there, thanks for all your helping questions and sharing your thoughts.
I got issue from user regarding Custom folder in Discvoerer while they try to run report, becoz there are item classes i created and its taking so long time to fetch LOVs.
Below is the query, I used to create custom folder and also created 3 LOVs (item classes) in Discverer Administrator, it is working well and good.
According to the requirement ( you can see bottom of this page) this is the query, Can anyone help me on how to improve performance, in TOAD the query takes long time, so for Item classes also it takes long time. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated, thanks in advance.
SELECT fu.user_name
, fu.description
, fu.start_date "User Start Date"
, fu.end_date "User End Date"
, frv.responsibility_name
, frv.start_date "Resp Start Date"
, frv.end_date "Resp End Date"
, furg.start_date "Resp Assignment Start Date"
, furg.end_date "Resp Assignment End Date"
, MAX (flr.start_time) AS "Last Logon"
, 'Y' as "Logon Flag"
FROM apps.fnd_user_resp_groups_direct furg
, apps.fnd_responsibility_vl frv
, applsys.fnd_user fu
, applsys.fnd_logins fl
, applsys.fnd_login_responsibilities flr
WHERE furg.responsibility_id = frv.responsibility_id
AND fu.user_id = furg.user_id
AND fl.user_id = fu.user_id
AND flr.responsibility_id = frv.responsibility_id
AND fl.login_id = flr.login_id
GROUP BY fu.user_name,
fu.description,
fu.start_date,
fu.end_date,
frv.responsibility_name,
frv.start_date,
frv.end_date,
furg.start_date,
furg.end_date
UNION ALL
SELECT fu.user_name
, fu.description
, fu.start_date "User Start Date"
, fu.end_date "User End Date"
, frv.responsibility_name
, frv.start_date "Resp Start Date"
, frv.end_date "Resp End Date"
, furg.start_date "Resp Assignment Start Date"
, furg.end_date "Resp Assignment End Date"
, NULL AS "Last Logon"
, 'N' as "Logon Flag"
FROM apps.fnd_user_resp_groups_direct furg
, apps.fnd_responsibility_vl frv
, applsys.fnd_user fu
WHERE furg.responsibility_id = frv.responsibility_id
AND fu.user_id = furg.user_id
AND (fu.user_id, frv.responsibility_id ) NOT IN (
SELECT fl.user_id, flr.responsibility_id
FROM applsys.fnd_logins fl,
applsys.fnd_login_responsibilities flr
WHERE fl.login_id = flr.login_id)
Requirement================
We have made use of modifications to a Discoverer report called 'Oracle Users and Responsibilities'. We use the report to review Oracle users and their associated responsibilities. We would like to see if it would be possible to make another report with fields from the above SQL query. The intent is to note when users last made use of a responsibility (last logged on with a responsibility). The above query needs some revision in the fact that it currently only returns responsibilities a user has logged in with. Ideally, we would like to also return the responsibilities a user has not logged in with. If a date parameter is supplied for a report, the end-user will be able to return all users, their responsibilities, and the last time the users logged in. The attached query can specify a user or the user's creation date; ideally, one would also be able to only pick responsibilities user(s) had prior to a specified date. Thus, if they wished to run a report to return all the users and the last time they logged in with their responsibilities if they have had the responsibility for at least 90 days, he could readily do so.

Hi,
You could try this query, but whether it will be quicker depends on how you are using the custom folder in your reports.
SELECT ilv.user_name
, ilv.user_id
, ilv.description
, ilv."User Start Date"
, ilv."User End Date"
, ilv.responsibility_name
, ilv.responsibility_id
, ilv."Resp Start Date"
, ilv."Resp End Date"
, ilv."Resp Assignment Start Date"
, ilv."Resp Assignment End Date"
, ilv_login.start_time "Last Logon"
, NVL2(ilv_login.user_id, 'Y','N') "Logon Flag"
FROM (
SELECT fu.user_name
, fu.user_id
, fu.description
, fu.start_date "User Start Date"
, fu.end_date "User End Date"
, frv.responsibility_name
, frv.responsibility_id
, frv.start_date "Resp Start Date"
, frv.end_date "Resp End Date"
, furg.start_date "Resp Assignment Start Date"
, furg.end_date "Resp Assignment End Date"
FROM apps.fnd_user_resp_groups_direct furg
, apps.fnd_responsibility_vl frv
, applsys.fnd_user fu
WHERE furg.responsibility_id = frv.responsibility_id
AND fu.user_id = furg.user_id
) ilv
,(SELECT fl.user_id
   , flr.responsibility_id
   , MAX(flr.start_time) start_time
FROM applsys.fnd_logins fl
, applsys.fnd_login_responsibilities flr
WHERE fl.login_id = flr.login_id
GROUP BY fl.user_id
   , flr.responsibility_id) ilv_login
WHERE ilv.user_id = ilv_login.user_id(+)
AND ilv.responsibility_id = ilv_login.responsibility_id(+)Rod West

Discoverer Performance/ Response Time

Hi everyone,
I have a few questions regarding the response time for discoverer.
I have Table A with 120 columns. I need to generate a report based on 12 columns from this table A.
The questions are whether the factors bellow contribute to the response time of discoverer.
1. The number of items included in the business area folder (i.e. whether to include 120 cols or just 12 cols)
2. The actual size of the physical table (120 cols) although I only selected 12 cols. If the actual size of the physical table is only 12 cols, would it improve the performance?
3. Will more parameters increase the processing time?
4. Does Joins increase the processing time?
5. Will using Custom Folder and writing an sql statement to select the 12 columns increase the performance?
Really appreciate anyone's help on this.
Cheers,
Angeline

Hi,
NP and Rod, thanks a lot for your replies!
Actually I was experiencing a different thing that contradicts your replies.
1. When I reduced the no of items included in my Biz Area from 120 to 12 the response time improve significantly from around 5 minutes to 2-3 minutes.
2. When I tried to create a dummy table with just 12 cols needed for the report, I could get a very fast response time, i.e. 1 second to generate the report. But of course the dummy table contains much less data (only around 500 K records). Btw, is Discoverer able to handle large database? What is the biggest record size can it handle?
3. When I add more parameters it seems to add more processing time to the discoverer.
4. Thanks for the clarification on this one.
5. And the funny thing is, when I use custom folder to just select the 12 columns, the performance also significantly improves with estimated query time reduced from 2 minutes plus to just 1 mins 30 secs. But still the performance time is inconsistent. Sometimes it only takes around 1 mins 40 secs, but sometimes it can run up to 3 mintues for the same data.
Now I am creating my report using the custom folder cause it has the best response time so far for me. But based on your replies it's not really encouraged to use the custom folder?
I need to improve the response time for the Discoverer Viewer as the response time is very slow and users don't really like it.
Would appreciate anyone's help in solving this issue :) Thanks..
Cheers,
Angeline

Discoverer performance issue

Hi All,
We are using R12(12.1)
OS:RHEL 4
We are experiencing performance issues on Discoverer.So could you please provide Details which can be tuned to make it fast.
Edited by: user8936206 on May 7, 2010 5:43 PM

Hi;
please check:
Using Discoverer 10.1.2 with Oracle E-Business Suite Release 12 [ID 373634.1]
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/html/B13918_03/maint.htm#i1028691
Deploying Sun JRE (Native Plug-in) for Windows Clients in Oracle E-Business Suite 11i [ID 290807.1]
Information on Earlier JInitiator Versions For Oracle E-Business Suite 11i [ID 232200.1]
Hope it helps
Regard
Helios

Discoverer 9.0.4.45.02 Performance issues

I see various performance issues with this version of discoverer.Like -
1.Reports taking a long time. eg - it take 25 minutes to display 100 recorrds
2.CPU spikes whie exporting reports to excel spreadsheet using discoverer viewer / plus.
I have read many whitepapers on performance issues. But nothing is very specific to discoverer 10g. Anybody encountered similar issues ?

It depends...
What kind of host do you have?
1) Have you checked memory consumtion - perhaps you're swapping a lot?
2) Have you checked the cpu consumtion - perhaps you need a better cpu or more cpu's.
3) How about network performance?
Regards,
Martin Malmstrom

Data base 1og and discovere performance

I have a rdbms 10g on hpux11 even Ihave a the discoverer suite rel 10.1.2.1 desktop and adminitrate version on an client windows XP. When I execute and query by discoverer, the performance y very pool. Any idea about if this it a variable or config the data base to get a good performance
regarding

Hi there ...
I have read the note - thats where I found the link to the trace note 286496.1 - on now to setup a trace
But I still need an explanation for the methods (1,2,4 etc)
regards
Mette

Oracle Discoverer Plus Performance

When trying to connect to the Discoverer on the Web, we need to wait a very long time(about 5-10 minutes!)
for each web page to be displayed ( those are the simple trivial pages of userid, query list, parameter window for running a query, etc…).
When we eventually get to run the query it runs very fast, so the problem is not the performance of the database.
It seems like the access to the web pages on the server or something to do with the JAVA is not working properly.
We tried to address the link for the discoverer plus with the server name and also with its IP address but the result was the same.
We tried a higher version of Java and it was no good.
The station from which we are running it, is a very strong one so it is not a problem of shortage in memory etc..
Do you have any idea how to deal with this problem?

Hi Hadar,
In general, I would recommend making sure the JRE being used is compliant (see these Knowledge Base articles):
Recommended Client Java Plug-in (JVM/JRE) For Discoverer Plus 10g (10.1.2) [ID 465234.1],
Discoverer 10g (10.1.2) Plus Applet User Interaction Has Slow Performance With Sun Java Plug-in 1.6.0_03 or Higher [ID 747189.1],
Slow Performance Launching Discoverer Plus 10.1.2 With SUN JRE 1.6 [ID 579211.1]
Patrick

Performance Discovere VS BI EE

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for