Regarding performance impact if I do DB accessing coding in comp Controller

Hi ,
This is my project requirement, I have to use some com compoment which in turn fetches data from the database. I am using a java com bridge tool to do this. This tool is generating the java proxy classes for the VB com component.
I am using java proxy classes( This class files are using JNI to connect to VB COM compnent and fetch the data from DB) in my webdynpro component controller.
The architecture is aas below
WEBDYNPRO >> JAVA Classes object( generated by the JAVA- COM bridge tool ) >> JAVA-COM bridge tool >> VB COM+ Component >> SQL server.
The issue
Performance :- first time it is OK but for Consecutive calls the application is going down very visibly and after 4 iteration it hangs . When I look at the log I am getting this
Message : Exception occured during processing of Web Dynpro application com/oreqsrch/com.oreqsrchapp.OReqSrchApp.
The causing exception is nested.
[EXCEPTION]
com.sap.tc.webdynpro.services.session.LockException: Thread SAPEngine_Application_Thread[impl:3]_36 failed to acquire exclusive lock on client session ClientSession(id=(J2EE9536400)ID1120562150DB11245826542790956137End_1159630423). Existing locks: LockingManager(ThreadName:SAPEngine_Application_Thread[impl:3]_36, exclusive client session lock:
ClientSessionLock(SAPEngine_Application_Thread[impl:3]_9), shared client session locks: ClientSessionSharedLockManager([]), app session locks: ApplicationSessionLockManager([]), current request: com/oreqsrch/com.oreqsrchapp.OReqSrchApp).
Hint: Take a thread dump of the server node to find the blocking thread that causes the problem.
Is this issue because I have return the code data access code in the component controller rather wrting in some beans ?
My questions regarding
What would the performance impact if write the DB access code in the webdynpro component controller rather than writing in a bean or an EJB?( I know ideally DB access code has to write in Bean or EJB ).
Please address this with respedct to performance point of view .
thanks
pkiran

Hi Both,
Thanks for the reply.
Yes they are closed and set it to null;
Connection max and mini properties are controlled at COM+ components in VB.
Since I am using COM - JAVA bridge, I am just invoking the methods defined ijn the VB code thru the bridge tool. all the objects which are retrieving the data are closed and nullify it.
My question is
if I write DB access code in component control instead in EJB or Java bean, will there be any performance issue ?
regards
pkiran

Similar Messages

EBS performance impact using it as a Data Source

I have a quick question on EBS performance. If I set up the EBS Database as a data source for SSRS (SQL Server Reporting Services), would there be a performance impact on EBS, due to SSRS accessing EBS Data for reports generation? Now, I know there'll always be a hit depending on the volume of data being accessed. But, my question is, will it be significantly higher using an external reporting tool using an ODBC connection rather than native XML Publisher.

I have a quick question on EBS performance. If I set up the EBS Database as a data source for SSRS (SQL Server Reporting Services), would there be a performance impact on EBS, due to SSRS accessing EBS Data for reports generation? Now, I know there'll always be a hit depending on the volume of data being accessed. But, my question is, will it be significantly higher using an external reporting tool using an ODBC connection rather than native XML Publisher.Hi,
Tough to answer without looking at data; my suggestion would be to have a test EBS environment setup, get permission from the vendors to run performance test without buying license - compare AWRs from both scenarios and then decide.
Generally speaking, native XML publisher (BI Publisher) has less of database performance hit than external reporting tools using ODBC.
Hope this helps.
Regards,

Performance Impact with OR concatenation / Inlist Iterator

Hello guys,
is there any performance impact with using OR concatenations or some IN-Lists?
The function of both is the "same":
1) Concatenation (OR-processing)
SELECT * FROM emp WHERE mgr# = 1 OR job = ‘YOURS’;- Similar to query rewrite into 2 seperate queries
- Which are then ‘concatenated’
2) Inlist Iterator
SELECT * FROM dept WHERE d# in (10,20,30);- Iteration over enumerated value-list
- Every value executed seperately
- Same as concatenation of 3 “OR-red” values
So i want to know if there is any performance impact if using IN-Lists instead of OR concatenations.
Thanks and Regards
Stefan

The note is very misleading and far from complete; but there is one critical point of difference that you need to observe. It's talking about using a tablescan to deal with an IN-list (and that's NOT "in-list iteration"), my comments start by saying "if there is a suitable indexed access path."
The note, by the way, describes a transformation to a UNION ALL - clearly that would be inefficient if there were no indexed access path. (Given the choice between one tablescan and several consecutive tablescans, which option would you choose ?).
The note, in effect, is just about a slightly more subtle version of "why isn't oracle using my index". For "shorter" lists you might get an indexed iteration, for "longer" lists you might get a tablescan.
Remember, Metalink is not perfect; most of it is just written by ordinary people who learned about Oracle in the normal fashion.
Quick example to demonstrate the difference between concatenation and iteration:
drop table t1;
create table t1 as
select
     rownum     id,
     rownum     n1,
     rpad('x',100)     padding
from
     all_objects
where
     rownum <= 10000
create index t1_i1 on t1(id);
execute dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user,'t1')
set autotrace traceonly explain
select
     /*+ use_concat(t1) */
     n1
from
     t1
where
     id in (10,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100)
set autotrace offThe execution plan I got from 8.1.7.4 was as follows - showing the transformation to a UNION ALL - this is concatenation and required 10 query block optimisations (which were all done three times):
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=20 Card=10 Bytes=80)
   1    0   CONCATENATION
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
   3    2       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
   4    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
   5    4       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
   6    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
   7    6       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
   8    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
   9    8       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
10    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
11   10       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
12    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
13   12       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
14    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
15   14       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
16    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
17   16       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
18    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
19   18       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
20    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=8)
21   20       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)This is the execution plan I got from 9.2.0.8, which doesn't transform to the UNION ALL, and only needs to optimise one query block.
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=3 Card=10 Bytes=80)
   1    0   INLIST ITERATOR
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'T1' (Cost=3 Card=10 Bytes=80)
   3    2       INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'T1_I1' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=2 Card=10)Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

Isolation level and performance impact?

Hi
I'm new to BDB JE and building some prototypes to evaluate it.
Given a simple usecase of storing the following key/value pair <String,List<Event>> mapping a user to his/her list of events, in the db. New events are added for the user, this happens (although fairly rarely) concurrently.
Using Serializable isolation will prevent any corruption to the list of events, since the events are effectively added serially to the user. I was wondering:
1. if there are any lesser levels of isolation that would still be adequate
2. using Serializable isolation, is there a performance impact on updating users non concurrently (ie there's no lock contention since for the majority of cases concurrent updates won't happen) vs the default isolation level?
3. building on 2. is there performance impact (other than obtaining and releasing locks) on using transactions with X isolation during updates of existing entries if there are no lock contention (ie, no concurrent updates) vs not using transactions at all?
Thanks!
Peter

Have you seen this section of the Getting Started Guide on isolation levels in JE? http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/je/TransactionGettingStarted/isolation.html
Our default is Repeatable Read, and that could be sufficient for your application depending on your access patterns, and the semantic sense of the items in your list. I think you're saying that the data portion of a record is the list of events itself. With RepeatableRead, you'll always see only committed data, and retrieving that record from a JE database will always return a consistent view of a given list. See http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/je/TransactionGettingStarted/isolation.html#serializable for an explanation of what additional guarantee you get with Serializable.
2. using Serializable isolation, is there a
performance impact on updating users non concurrently
(ie there's no lock contention since for the majority
of cases concurrent updates won't happen) vs the
default isolation level?Yes, there is an additional cost. When using Serializable isolation, additional locks are taken on adjacent data records. In addition to the cost of acquiring the lock (which would be low in a non-contention case), there may be additional I/O needed to fetch adjacent data records.
3. building on 2. is there performance impact (other
than obtaining and releasing locks) on using
transactions with X isolation during updates of
existing entries if there are no lock contention (ie,
no concurrent updates) vs not using transactions at
all? In (2) we compared the cost of Serializable to RepeatableRead. In (3), we're comparing the cost of non-transactional access to the default Repeatable Read transaction.
Non-transactional is always a bit cheaper, even if there is no lock contention. On top of the cost of acquiring the locks, non-transactional operations use less memory and disk space, and execute some transaction setup and teardown code. If there are concurrent operations, even in there is no contention on a given lock, there could be some stress on the lock table latches and transaction tables. That said, if your application is I/O bound, the cpu differences between non-txnal and txnal operations becomes more of a secondary factor. If you're I/O bound, the memory and disk space overhead does matter, because the cache is more efficiently used with non-txnal operations.
Regards,
Linda
>
Thanks!
Peter

CCMS implementation performance impact

Dears
I'm looking for information on the impact on performance of a CCMS implementation.
Impact on Solution Manager, impact on managed SAP systems. I opened a customer message but SAP comes back with there is no sizing documentation for ccms.
The purpose is to add a lot of managed SAP system into SAP Solution Manager and enable CCMS + IT Performance Reporting. I would like to know how much impact the RFC access causes.
If anyone has done a study on this or has information on this please share.
Kind regards
Tom

@Mauricio Yes I do understand the principal behind it. From a logical point of view it should improve performance but then again tests should have been run to prove the point.
For example: I'm involved in the pilot program for SAPJVM 4.1 and while SAP sais the performance should be the same or better but we all know SAP doesn't have every combination of OSDBSAP system running. It's the same principal, from a logical point of view it should be the same or better but one should do some performance tests to verify if it's the case.
@Augusto No problem on the misunderstanding, it shows my question wasn't that great and I should have provided more information
The point is that we have a lot of managed SAP systems to add and apparently SAP doesn't have that many customers that have a big number of managed SAP systems in the Solution Manager. The performance impact of CCMS implementation is neglictible if you only have some managed SAP systems. What is a 3% CPU rise in that case, shouldn't be a problem but now imagine you put in thirty times as much SAP systems then it can be become a problem if you don't foresee additional server resources.
A lot of those scenario's seem to have been tested with only a few managed SAP systems, doing a full landscape fetch through transaction SMSY takes a long time for example. I do know in Solution Manager 7.1 there is another component in between the SLD and SMSY which can synchronize content faster to avoid long runtime.
Another example was the landscape verification tool 1.0 which I reviewed in a blog. It didn't have a possibility to refresh single systems (I haven't checked latest version) but that is a problem if you have many managed SAP systems and you want to just check one. In the video demo's it flashes and it's very fast because there are only five managed SAP systems.
I'm looking forward to Solution Manager 7.1 but these kind of performance impacts should be known really. Doing a small implementation is no problem but customers are really interested in application lifecycle management and so on and are starting to generate demand for a lot of different scenario's. Sizing it is not that hard in small environment but once the environments become larger and a lot of managed SAP systems are involved the issue I see with CCMS for example rises and it becomes very hard to size properly. Perhaps it could be integrated into the quick sizer (number of managed SAP systems and enablement/use of certain scenarios).
I do know for some scenarios there is sizing documentation available, diagnostics being one of those.

Performance impact of Web Services

As WebLogic adds support for Web Services to its platform, what is
your plan for quantifying the performance impact and the functional
correctness of using web services before going live with the final
application.
Empirix is hosting a free one hour web event discussion on web
services testing and automated web services testing solutions on
Thursday, January 17, 2-3pm Eastern time.
To register for this web event or learn about other web events being
offering by Empirix this month, go to:
http://webevents.empirix.com
The complete abstract is below:
The advent of web services has brought the promises of integrating
multiple software applications from heterogeneous networks and for
exchanging information from vendor-to-vendor or vendor-to-consumer in
a standardized way.
As web service technologies are deployed within and across
organizations over the next several years, it will be critical that
web services undergo performance testing. As with any enterprise
software project, the adoption of proper test methodologies and use of
testing tools will play a key part in the overall success or failure
of projects utilizing web services. In a compressed software project
schedule, an organization must quickly determine if its web services
will operate successfully under a variety of load conditions. Like
other web-based technologies, successful web services will need to
respond quickly and correctly when implemented.
During our presentation, we will discuss the testing challenges
created by this emerging technology, along with the variety of testing
solutions available. Automated web service testing will be discussed
and demonstrated using FirstACT, the first web services performance
testing solution available on the market. Using a sample web service,
automatic test case creation, scalability testing, and results
analysis will be explored.

Hi,
We test several frameworks and find out that usually JAXB 2.0 performs better than XMLBeans, but that is not a strict rule.
Regards,
LG

Index creation online - performance impact on database

hi,
I have oracle 11.1.0.7 database running on Linux as 3 node RAC.
I have a huge table which has more than 255 columns and is about 400GB in size which is also highly fragmented because of constant DML activities.
Questions:
1. For now i am trying to create an index Online while the business applications are running.
Will there be any performance impact on the database to create index Online on a single column of a table 'TBL' while applications are active against the same table? So basically my question will index creation on a object during DML operations on the same object have performance impact on the database? is there a major performance impact difference in the database in creating index online and not online?
2. I tried to build an index on a column which has NULL value on this same table 'TBL' which has more than 255 columns and is about 400GB in size highly fragmented and has about 140 million rows.
I requested the applications to be shutdown, but the index creation with parallel of 4 a least took more than 6 hours to complete.
We have a Pre-Prod database which has the exported and imported copy of the Prod data. So the pre-Prod is a highly de-fragmented copy of the Prod.
When i created the same index on the same column with NULL, it only took 15 minutes to complete.
Not sure why on a highly fragmented copy of Prod it took more than 6 hours compared to highly defragmented copy of Pre-Prod where the index creation took only 15 minutes.
Any thoughts would be helpful.
Thanks.
Phil.

How are you measuring the "fragmentation" of the table ?
Is the pre-prod database running single instance or RAC ?
Did you collect any workload stats (AWR / Statspack) on the pre-prod and production systems while creating (or failing to create) the index ?
Did you check whether the index creation ended up in-memory, single pass or multi pass in in the two environments ?
The commonest explanation for this type of difference is two-fold:
a) the older data needs a lot of delayed block cleanout, which results in a lot of random I/O to the undo tablespace - slowing down I/O generally
b) the newer end of the table is subject to lots of change, so needs a lot of work relating to read-consistency - which also means I/O on the undo system
-- UPDATED: but you did say that you had stopped the application so this bit wouldn't have been relevant.
On top of this, an online (re)build has to lock the table briefly at the start and end of the build, and in a busy system you can wait a long time for the locks to be acquired - and if the system has been busy while the build has been going on it can take quite a long time to apply the journal file to finish the index build.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis

Performance impact using nested tables and object

Hi,
Iam using oracle 11g.
While creating a package, iam using lot of nested tables created based on objects which will be passed between multiple functions in the package..
Will it have any performance impact since all the data is stored in the memory.
How can i measure the performance impact when the data grows ?
Regards,
Oracle User
Edited by: user9080289 on Jun 30, 2011 6:07 AM
Edited by: user9080289 on Jun 30, 2011 6:42 AM

user9080289 wrote:
While creating a package, iam using lot of nested tables created based on objects which will be passed between multiple functions in the package.. Not the best of ideas in general, in PL/SQL. This is not client code that can lay sole claim to most of the memory. It is server code and one of many server processes that need to share the available resources. So capitalism is fine on a client, but you need socialism on the server? {noformat} ;-) {noformat}
Will it have any performance impact since all the data is stored in the memory.Interestingly yes. Usually crunching data in memory is better. In this case it may not be so. The memory used is the most expensive memory Oracle can use - the PGA. Private process memory. This means each process copy running that code, will need lots of memory.
If you're not passing the data structures by reference, it means even bigger demands on memory as the data structure needs to be copied into the call stack and duplicated.
The worse case scenario is that such code consumes so much free server memory, and make such huge demands on having that in pysical memory, it trashes memory management as the swap daemons are unable to keep up with the demand of swapping virtual memory pages into and out of memory. Most CPU time is spend by the swap daemons.
I have seen servers crash due to this. I have seen a single PL/SQL process causing this.
How can i measure the performance impact when the data grows ?Well, you need to look at the impact of your code on PGA memory. It is not SQL performance or I/O performance that is a factor - just how much private process memory your code needs in order to execute.

Performance impact on the size of the CHM file

Is there any impact on performance depending on the size of a
CHM file?

The main issues people have with help file performance
(regardless of whether it is a CHM file) are related to the number
of images, DHTML hotspots, bookmarks and links they have in a
topic. The number of topics in a CHM should not be an issue. What
exactly are you trying to access the performance impact of?

Performance Impact When Using SNC Communication

Hello,
Does anybody know if and how much performance impact there is if we use SNC for communication between the SAP Server and SAPGUI?
I think there are two areas that may be impacted; Network and server CPU.
For network load, I did find a part in "Front-End Network Requirements for SAP Business Solutions" document saying "overhead of roughly 350 bytes per user interaction step" but it does not specify the type of encryption. I wonder if there is any other info on this?
For CPU impact, how much overhead should I consider for sapgui access?
I see no field for this in the quicksizer and I can't seem to find any white papers on this subject.
Thank you in advance.

>
Peter Adams wrote:
> Ken,
>
> if you plan to use SAPcryptlib for SNC between SAP servers, then you should use a SAPcryptolib-compatible solution for the SNC communication between SAPGUI and SAP server, and there is only one vendor who can provide this. Let me know, if you need help finding it. My contact information is in my SDN business card.
Just so Kan is clear - It is not legal to use the SAP cryptolib provided by SAP for SNC between SAP GUI and SAP servers, so if x.509 is the desired mechanism you need to purchase additional software from the company which Peter works for to provide SAP GUI SNC-based SSO. I think instead, Kan might be using the free SAP supplied SNC Kerberos library, which is why I asked him to confirm this in my last post. I doubt he is interested to buy any third party software.
> As to the performance discussion: first of all, yes, there will be a small performance impact if SNC is used (no matter which type or implementation), but from our experience with many actual SNC implementations, I can state that this is practically not relevant. It is not noticeable by users. There were never any performance discussions with customers. See also SAP Note 1043694.
I agree with this - the performance impact is not noticed by users, but the system managers who look after the servers where SAP is installed, and the team responsible for the network need to be aware of any differences (if any) when SNC is turned on and when SNC is turned off. I think this is why Kan is asking these questions, not because he is concerned about users noticing any difference when they logon to SAP.
> Just a first quick comment on certain statements above: Tim's arguments for proving his overall statement are not conclusive from my perspective. Nor do I think his overall statement itself is correct.
The facts I mentioned are well known facts, e.g. symmetric crypto is far better from performance point of view than asymmetric. I know the examples I have shown which I found when doing a quick google search were not conclusive, but they were shown as initial examples, not necessarily the best examples. This is why I specifically mentioned that if you search in google yourself you will see many more references where comparisons are done between Kerberos (e.g. symmatric) compared with PKI (e.g. asymmetric).
> First of all, he only selects one aspect of performance - CPU impact of encryption algorithms.
No, I didn't. Some of the examples I referred to also discuss other differences. I also mentioend other differences such as memory and what protection level is used when configuring SNC.
> But for a true comparison, you'd have to look at all relevant aspects (latency, network overhead, ...).
Yes, I agree. No doubts here.
>Network performance overhead is usuallly worse with Kerberos than with PKI.
This is not true. When SAP is using SNC, the GSS-API standard is used and so the only network communication involves SAP software sending a standard GSS token from the workstation to the SAP server, and this GSS token is often about the same size, regardless of which mechanism is used, so any network performance differences are not related to the mechanism, but more related to the complexity of the cryptography used on each end (mostly on the server side).
>Second, you need to look at the specific usage scenario. For example, the first report referenced by Tim is an analysis about different Token Profile mechanism for WS Security, for one specific implementation. This does not allow to draw any conclusion for the SNC use case in general, and for sure not for a specific implemenation. It does not take the overhead for the encryption of the message content into account. Third, Tim associates PKI exclusively with asymmetric encryption. Yes, it is well known that asymmetric algorithms are slower than symmetric ones, but it is also well known that the encryption of the message content (by far the majority of the data) happens with symmetric encryption algorithms in the PKI scenario. With PKI-based SNC, you can even select a symmetric algorithm and use a more performant one that the ones that Kerberos prescribes.
Kerberos works with many different symmetric algorithms as well, so mentioning that the alg is selectable is not relavent to any comparison.
> To summarize, I will try and collect facts that will support the opposite point of view. From our practical experience, the performance overhead is not relevant, and criteria like consistency with SAPcryptolib, strength of security, ease of administration, choice of authentication and encryption mechanism, etc. are much more important.
>
> Peter

Performance Impact of Using Sessions

All,
I have a general question regarding the performance impact of using Sessions
within a Servlet. Specifically, I'm working with a group that wants to use
the Session object to store customer contacts temporarily. The application
is expected to service 2000 concurrent users, each maintaining no more then
200 contacts each of which is about 1KB. The planned configuration is for a
cluster of 10 instances of WLS. That said do we have any benchmark data
that might assist in the session replication design, i.e. using in-memory
across the cluster, using DBMS, etc.?
Any information would be appreciated.
Later,
Jim Harrald
BEA Systems
Office: (901)263-4097
Cell: (901)568-9267
email: [email protected]

All,
I have a general question regarding the performance impact of using Sessions
within a Servlet. Specifically, I'm working with a group that wants to use
the Session object to store customer contacts temporarily. The application
is expected to service 2000 concurrent users, each maintaining no more then
200 contacts each of which is about 1KB. The planned configuration is for a
cluster of 10 instances of WLS. That said do we have any benchmark data
that might assist in the session replication design, i.e. using in-memory
across the cluster, using DBMS, etc.?
Any information would be appreciated.
Later,
Jim Harrald
BEA Systems
Office: (901)263-4097
Cell: (901)568-9267
email: [email protected]

Performance impact on oracle 11g database by audit enable

Hi All,
Shall we enable audit on some siebel db tables like s_party s_contacts s_order s_quote s_org_ext
We need to see who deleted account records from oracle tables manually
Since auditing is not enabled.
We have given delete privelege to to all users as required by Siebel application.
So Is this good idea to get Auditing enabled on these selected tables or Is there any performance impact on database.
Is it good idea to enable audit for these tables espacially in siebel
SQL> select * from v$version;
BANNER
Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.1.0 - 64bit Production
PL/SQL Release 11.2.0.1.0 - Production
CORE 11.2.0.1.0 Production
TNS for HPUX: Version 11.2.0.1.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 11.2.0.1.0 - Production

Hello,
Ok do it and generate AWR to see how the performance is getting impacted.remember auditing just some tables is not a big matter but auditing everything is the problem that is why fine grained auditing exist.please also remember to clean the audit records regularly because the auditing will be just a problem with the space in case you have many deletes which should not happen in your case.
Kind regards
Mohamed

Performance Impact of Unique Constraint on a Date Column

In a table I have a compound unique constraint which extends over 3 columns. As a part of functionality I need to add another DATE column to this unique constraint.
I would like to know the performance implications of adding a DATE column to the unique constraint. Would the DATE column behave like another VARCHAR2 or NUMBER column, or would it degrade the performance significantly?
Thanks
Message was edited by:
user627808

What performance are you concerned about degrading? Inserts? Or queries? If you're talking about queries, what sort of access path are you concerned about?
Are you concerned that merely changing the definition of the unique constraint would impact performance? Or are you worried that whatever functional change you are making would impact performance (i.e. if you are now retaining historical data in the table rather than just updating it)?
Regardless of the performance impact, unique indexes (and unique constraints) need to be correct. If you need to allow duplicates on the 3 current columns with different dates, then you would need to change the unique constraint definition regardless of the performance impact. Fast and wrong generally isn't going to be preferrable to slow and right.
Generally, though, there probably is no reason to be terribly concerned about performance here. Indexing a date is no different than indexing any other primitive data type.
Justin

Queries Performance impact

Hi Team,
          We have few queries which were running good until last week; but for the past 3 days these queries were facing severe some performance issues and timeout dumps in the back-end.
For some selections it is running long and for some selection it is executing quicker and for some selection it is getting time out.
We made a complete data rebuild for the queries connected data targets (data rebuild from the source) before 3 days; after which the query performance issue faced.
No changes were made to the queries or objects for the last 2 months.
Data Flow - Query -> Multi Provider -> Infoset -> InfoCube -> DSO -> Datasource (DB Connect).
Note:
In Query we have nested aggregation to handle the result rows; but again no changes to it for the past 2 months.
We have loaded data in one single request at the InfoCube level.
          I mean some 2 million records with different plants in one single request do it have performance impact while reading data?
Can anyone please throw light on the possible cause for the performance issue?
Thanks
Regards
San

Hi San,
As you said that you completely loaded data and then only your performance issues started, can you please tell whether you are using any BIA for reporting?.
If not BIA, can you please delete the DB staticstics for those Infocubes and then create the DB statistics for the same.
Also you completely rebuild the data which means drop and reload, your PSATEMPSPACE OR your temporarrily file space   might have completely build. Ask your basis team to check the space in the tables.
Regards,
Rajesh

How to handle Integrated Configuration performance impact on AAE/Java AS

Hi there,
Recently I have moved a configuration scenario from standard flow involving both ABAP and Java stacks, to Integrated Configuration usage. Undoubtedly, this will increase the load on AAE/Java stack. However, do you have link to some clear (official - even better) guidelines - what configurational changes should be done on Java side in order to handle the performance impact of such transition?
Best Regards,
Lalo

Hi Lalo,
In fact, using AAE generates no traffic in ABAP stack at all (it is ommited when processing a message), while the traffic in Java stack should be lower than for normal scenario. The performance should be noticeably better, thanks to smaller number of persistence steps and no costly HTTP connections between stacks. For more details, please refer to this document:
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/2016a0b1-1780-2b10-97bd-be3ac62214c7
Important quotation from this document:
Since the Integration Engine is bypassed for local message processing in the AAE, the resource consumption both in memory and CPU is lower. This leads to higher message throughput, and faster response times which especially is important for synchronous scenarios.
Moreover, have a look at this document, especially its beginning, for details about the architecture of AAE processing:
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/70066f78-7794-2c10-2e8c-cb967cef407b
Hope this helps,
Greg

Regarding performance impact if I do DB accessing coding in comp Controller

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for