Select statement performance improvement.

HI Guru's,
I am new to ABAP.
I have the below select stement
000304         SELECT mandt msgguid pid exetimest
000305           INTO TABLE lt_key
000306           UP TO lv_del_rows ROWS
000307           FROM (gv_master)
000308           WHERE
000309 *          msgstate   IN rt_msgstate
000310 *          AND   ( adapt_stat = cl_xms_persist=>co_stat_adap_processed
000311 *          OR      adapt_stat = cl_xms_persist=>co_stat_adap_undefined )
000312 *          AND     itfaction = ls_itfaction
000313 *          AND     msgtype    = cl_xms_persist=>co_async
000314 *          AND
000315           exetimest LE lv_timestamp
000316           AND     exetimest GE last_ts
000317           AND     reorg      = cl_xms_persist=>co_reorg_ini
000318           ORDER BY mandt itfaction reorg exetimest.
Can anyone help me how i can improve the performance of this statement?
Here is the sql trace for the statement:
SELECT
/*+
FIRST_ROWS (100)
"MANDT" , "MSGGUID" , "PID" , "EXETIMEST"
FROM
"SXMSPMAST"
WHERE
"MANDT" = :A0 AND "EXETIMEST" <= :A1 AND "EXETIMEST" >= :A2 AND "REORG" = :A3
ORDER BY
"MANDT" , "ITFACTION" , "REORG" , "EXETIMEST"
Execution Plan
SELECT STATEMENT ( Estimated Costs = 3 , Estimated #Rows = 544 )
        4 SORT ORDER BY
          ( Estim. Costs = 2 , Estim. #Rows = 544 )
          Estim. CPU-Costs = 15.671.852 Estim. IO-Costs = 1
            3 FILTER
                2 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SXMSPMAST
                  ( Estim. Costs = 1 , Estim. #Rows = 544 )
                  Estim. CPU-Costs = 11.130 Estim. IO-Costs = 1
                    1 INDEX RANGE SCAN SXMSPMAST~TST
                      Search Columns: 2
                      Estim. CPU-Costs = 3.329 Estim. IO-Costs = 0
Do I need to create any new index ? Do i need to remove the Order By clause?
Thanks in advance.

why is there an
UP TO lv_del_rows ROWS
together with an ORDER BY?
The database will find all rows fulfilling the condition but returns only the largest Top lv_del_rows.
Therefore it can take a while.
Your index, always put the client field at first position.
actually I am not really convinced by your logic:
itfaction reorg exetimest.
itfaction is the first in the sort order, so all records with the smallest itfactio will come first, but itfaction is not specified, is this really what you want?
Change the index to mandt reorg exetimest reorg
and change the ORDER BY to mandt reorg exetimest
then it will become fast.
* AND ( adapt_stat = cl_xms_persist=>co_stat_adap_processed
000311 * OR adapt_stat = cl_xms_persist=>co_stat_adap_undefined )
000312 * AND itfaction = ls_itfaction
000313 * AND msgtype = cl_xms_persist=>co_async
000314 * AND
000315 exetimest LE lv_timestamp
000316 AND exetimest GE last_ts
000317 AND reorg = cl_xms_persist=>co_reorg_ini
000318 ORDER BY mandt itfaction reorg exetimest.

Similar Messages

Joining select statements-performance problem

Here two cases are there.Is it posiible to combine the two cases and make it one? I am using OR in the select statement, performance is very bad, i want to improve it.Is there any chance of avoiding that...
1.
select vbeln from vbfa into itab-vbeln where vbelv = final_data-xblnr1
or vbelv = final_data-xblnr2.
select single vbeln from vbrk into tabvbrk-vbeln
where vbeln = itab-vbeln and fkart = 'RTS'.
if sy-subrc eq 0.
move tabvbrk-vbeln to final_data-vbeln1.
modify final_data.
endif.
endselect.
2.
select vbeln from vbfa into itab-vbeln where vbelv = final_data-xblnr1
or vbelv = final_data-xblnr2.
select single vbeln from vbrk into tabvbrk-vbeln
where vbeln = itab-vbeln and fkart = 'ZTR'.
if sy-subrc eq 0.
move tabvbrk-vbeln to final_data-vbeln2.
modify final_data.
endif.
endselect.
Thanks,
fractal

The first main thing is dont use select... endselect.
select vbeln from vbfa into itab-vbeln where vbelv = final_data-xblnr1
or vbelv = final_data-xblnr2.
U can use
select vbeln from vbfa into
corresponding fields of table itab
for all entries in final_data
where vbelv = final_data-xblnr1
or   vbelv = final_data-xblnr2.
Instead of this
select single vbeln from vbrk into tabvbrk-vbeln
where vbeln = itab-vbeln and fkart = 'RTS'.
if sy-subrc eq 0.
move tabvbrk-vbeln to final_data-vbeln1.
modify final_data.
endif.
endselect.
Use
select vbeln from vbrk
        appending table final_data
        where vbeln = itab-vbeln
        and fkart = 'RTS'.
if sy-subrc eq 0.
endif.
Try like this.
Hope this helps.
Kindly reward points for the answer which helped u and helped to solve the problem.

How to find for which select statement performance is more

hi gurus
can anyone suggest me
if we have 2 select statements than
how to find for which select statement performance is more
thanks&regards
kals.

hi check this..
1 .the select statement in which the primary and secondary keys are used will gives the good performance .
2.if the select statement had select up to i row is good than the select single..
go to st05 and check the performance..
regards,
venkat

In how many ways we can filter this select statement to improve performance

Hi Experts,
This select statement taking 2.5 hrs in production, Can we filter the where condition, to improve the performance.Plz suggest with coding ASAP.
select * from dfkkop into table t_dfkkop
           where   vtref   like 'EPC%'        and
               ( ( augbd      = '00000000'   and
                   xragl      = 'X' )
                           or
                 ( augbd between w_clrfr and w_clrto ) ) and
                   augrd      ne '03'         and
                   zwage_type in s_wtype .
Regards,
Sam.

if it really takes 2.5 hours, try the followingtry to run the SQL trace and
select *
          into table t_dfkkop
          from dfkkop
          where vtref like 'EPC%'
          and augbd = '00000000' and xragl
         and augrd ne '03'
         and zwage_type in s_wtype .
select *
          appending table t_dfkkop
          from dfkkop
          where vtref like 'EPC%'
         and augbd between w_clrfr and w_clrto
         and augrd ne '03'
         and zwage_type in s_wtype .
Do a DESCRIBE TABLE after the first SELECT and after the second,
or run an SQL Trace.
What is time needed for both parts, how many records come back, which index is used.
Siegfried

Provide alternative select statements to improve performance

Hi Frnds
I want to improve the performance of my report. below statement is taking more time. Please provide any suggestions to include alternative statement for the below select statement.
SELECT H~CLMNO H~PNGUID P~PVGUID V~PNGUID AS V_PNGUID
           V~AKTIV V~KNUMV P~POSNR V~KATEG AS ALTNUM   V~VERSN
         APPENDING CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE EX_WTYKEY_T
         FROM ( ( PNWTYH AS H
           INNER JOIN PNWTYV AS V ON V~HEADER_GUID   = H~PNGUID )
           INNER JOIN PVWTY AS P ON P~VERSION_GUID = V~PNGUID )
         FOR ALL ENTRIES IN lt_claim
        WHERE H~PNGUID = lt_claim-pnguid
           AND V~AKTIV IN rt_AKTIV
           AND V~KATEG IN IM_ALTNUM_T.
Thanks
Amminesh.
Moderator message - Moved to the correct forum
Edited by: Rob Burbank on May 14, 2009 11:00 AM

Hi,
Copy the internal table lt_claim contents to another temp internal table.
lt_claim_temp[] = lt_claim[].
sort lt_claim_temp by pnguid.
delete adjacent duplicates from lt_claim_temp comparing pnguid.
SELECT HCLMNO HPNGUID PPVGUID VPNGUID AS V_PNGUID
           VAKTIV VKNUMV PPOSNR VKATEG AS ALTNUM   V~VERSN
         APPENDING CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE EX_WTYKEY_T
         FROM ( ( PNWTYH AS H
           INNER JOIN PNWTYV AS V ON VHEADER_GUID   = HPNGUID )
           INNER JOIN PVWTY AS P ON PVERSION_GUID = VPNGUID )
         FOR ALL ENTRIES IN lt_claim_temp
        WHERE H~PNGUID = lt_claim-pnguid
           AND V~AKTIV IN rt_AKTIV
           AND V~KATEG IN IM_ALTNUM_T.
refresh lt_claim_temp.

ABAP Select statement performance (with nested NOT IN selects)

Hi Folks,
I'm working on the ST module and am working with the document flow table VBFA. The query takes a large amount of time, and is timing out in production. I am hoping that someone would be able to give me a few tips to make this run faster. In our test environment, this query take 12+ minutes to process.
    SELECT vbfa~vbeln
           vbfa~vbelv
           Sub~vbelv
           Material~matnr
           Material~zzactshpdt
           Material~werks
           Customer~name1
           Customer~sortl
      FROM vbfa JOIN vbrk AS Parent ON ( Parentvbeln = vbfavbeln )
             JOIN vbfa AS Sub ON ( Subvbeln = vbfavbeln )
             JOIN vbap AS Material ON ( Materialvbeln = Subvbelv )
             JOIN vbak AS Header ON ( Headervbeln = Subvbelv )
             JOIN vbpa AS Partner ON ( Partnervbeln = Subvbelv )
             JOIN kna1 AS Customer ON ( Customerkunnr = Partnerkunnr )
      INTO (WA_Transfers-vbeln,
            WA_Transfers-vbelv,
            WA_Transfers-order,
            WA_Transfers-MATNR,
            WA_Transfers-sdate,
            WA_Transfers-sfwerks,
            WA_Transfers-name1,
            WA_Transfers-stwerks)
      WHERE vbfa~vbtyp_n = 'M'       "Invoice
      AND vbfa~fktyp = 'L'           "Delivery Related Billing Doc
      AND vbfa~vbtyp_v = 'J'         "Delivery Doc
      AND vbfa~vbelv IN S_VBELV
      AND Sub~vbtyp_n = 'M'          "Invoice Document Type
      AND Sub~vbtyp_v = 'C'          "Order Document Type
      AND Partner~parvw = 'WE'       "Ship To Party(actual desc. is SH)
      AND Material~zzactshpdt IN S_SDATE
      AND ( Parentfkart = 'ZTRA' OR Parentfkart = 'ZTER' )
      AND vbfa~vbelv NOT IN
         ( SELECT subvbfa~vbelv
           FROM vbfa AS subvbfa
           WHERE subvbfavbelv = vbfavbelv
           AND   subvbfa~vbtyp_n = 'V' )           "Purchase Order
      AND vbfa~vbelv NOT IN
         ( SELECT DelList~vbeln
           FROM vbfa AS DelList
           WHERE DelListvbeln = vbfavbelv
           AND   DelList~vbtyp_v = 'C'             "Order Document Type
           AND   DelList~vbelv IN                  "Delivery Doc
              ( SELECT OrderList~vbelv
                FROM vbfa AS OrderList
                WHERE OrderList~vbtyp_n = 'H' )    "Return Ord
      APPEND WA_Transfers TO ITAB_Transfers.
    ENDSELECT.
Cheers,
Chris

I am sending u some of the performance isuues that are to be kept in mind while coding.
1.Donot use Select *...... instead use Select <required list>......
2.Donot fetch data from CLUSTER tables.
3.Donot use Nested Select statements as. U have used nested select which reduces performance to a greater extent.
Instead use views/join .
Also keep in mind that not use join condition for more for more than three tables unless otherwise required.
So split select statements into three or four and use Select ......for all entries....
4.Extract the data from the database atonce consolidated upfront into table.
i.e. use INTO TABLE <ITAB> clause instead of using
Select----
End Select.
5.Never use order by clause in Select ..... statement. instead use SORT<itab>.
6.When ever u need to calculate max,min,avg,sum,count use AGGREGATE FUNCTIONS and GROUP BY clause insted of calculating by userself..
7.Donot use the same table once for Validation and another time for data extraction.select data only once.
8.When the intention is for validation use Select single ....../Select.......up to one rows ......statements.
9.If possible always use array operations to update the database tables.
10.Order of the fields in the where clause select statement must be in the same order in the index of table.
11.Never release the object unless throughly checked by st05/se30/slin.
12.Avoid using identical select statements.

Select query performance improvement - Index on EDIDC table

Hi Experts,
I have a scenario where in I have to select data from the table EDIDC. The select query being used is given below.
SELECT docnum
          direct
          mestyp
          mescod
          rcvprn
          sndprn
          upddat
          updtim
INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE t_edidc
FROM edidc
FOR ALL ENTRIES IN t_error_idoc
WHERE
upddat GE gv_date1 AND
upddat LE gv_date2 AND
updtim GE p_time AND
status EQ t_error_idoc-status.
As the volume of the data is very high, our client requested to put up some index or use an existing one to improve the performance of the data selection query.
Question:
4.    How do we identify the index to be used.
5.    On which fields should the indexing be done to improve the performance (if available indexes donu2019t cater to our case).
6.    What will be the impact on the table performance if we create a new index.
Regards ,
Raghav

Question:
1.    How do we identify the index to be used.
Generally the index is automatically selected by SAP (DB Optimizer ) ( You can still mention the index name in your select query by changing the syntax)
For your select Query the second Index will be called automatically by the Optimizer, ( Because the select query has u2018Updatu2019 , u2018uptimu2019 in the sequence before the u2018statusu2019 ) .
2.    On which fields should the indexing be done to improve the performance (if available indexes donu2019t cater to our case).
(Create a new Index with MANDT and the 4 fields which are in the where clause in sequence )
3.    What will be the impact on the table performance if we create a new index.
( Since the index which will be newly created is only the 4th index for the table, there shouldnu2019t be any side affects)
After creation of index , Check the change in performance of the current program and also some other programs which are having the select queries on EDIDC ( Various types of where clauses preferably ) to verify that the newly created index is not having the negative impact on the performance. Additionally, if possible , check if you can avoid into corresponding fields .
Regards ,
Seth

Problem with Select Statements

Hi All,
I have a performance problem for my report because of the following statements.
How can i modify the select statements for improving the performance of the report.
DATA : shkzg1h LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg1s LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg2h LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg2s LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg1hu LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg1su LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg2hu LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         shkzg2su LIKE bsad-shkzg,
         kopbal1s LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal2s LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal1h LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal2h LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal1su LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal2su LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal1hu LIKE bsad-dmbtr,
         kopbal2hu LIKE bsad-dmbtr.
*These statements are in LOOP.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg1s , kopbal1s)
      FROM bsid
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'S'
       AND umskz EQ ''
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg1su , kopbal1su)
      FROM bsid
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'S'
       AND umskz IN zspgl
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg1h , kopbal1h)
      FROM bsid
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'H'
       AND umskz EQ ''
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg1hu , kopbal1hu)
      FROM bsid
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'H'
       AND umskz IN zspgl
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg2s , kopbal2s)
      FROM bsad
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'S'
       AND umskz EQ ''
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg2su , kopbal2su)
      FROM bsad
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'S'
       AND umskz IN zspgl
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg2h , kopbal2h)
      FROM bsad
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'H'
       AND umskz EQ ''
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.
    SELECT shkzg SUM( dmbtr )
      INTO (shkzg2hu , kopbal2hu)
      FROM bsad
     WHERE bukrs = ibukrs
       AND kunnr = ktab-kunnr
       AND budat < idate-low
       AND shkzg = 'H'
       AND umskz IN zspgl
     GROUP BY shkzg.
    ENDSELECT.

>
Siegfried Boes wrote:
> Please stop writing answers if you understrand nothing about database SELECTS!
> All above recommendations are pure nonsense!
>
> As always with such questions, you must do an analysis before you ask! The coding itself is perfectly o.k., a SELECT with an aggregate and a GROUP BY can not be changed into a SELECT SINGLE or whatever.
>
> But your SELECTS mustr be supported by indexes!
>
> Please run SQL Trace, and tell us the results:
>
> I see 8 statements, what is the duration and the number of records coming back for each statement?
> Maybe only one statement is slow.
>
> See
> SQL trace:
> /people/siegfried.boes/blog/2007/09/05/the-sql-trace-st05-150-quick-and-easy
>
>
> Siegfried
Nice point there Siegfried. Instead of giving constructive suggestion, people here give a very bad suggestion on using SELECT SINGLE combined with SUM and GROUP BY.
I hope the person already look at your reply before he try using select single and wondering why he has error.
Anyway, the most important thing is how many loop expected for those select statements?
If you have like thousands of loop, you can expect a poor performance.
So, you should also look at how many times the select statement is called and not only performance for each select statement when you're doing SQL trace.
Regards,
Abraham

Help needed with a SELECT statement. How can I make it run faster?

Hi,
not sure if my brain is just too tired but I can't seem to crack this problem today.
Here is my scenario.
I have 2 tables
TABLE1 (searchId INTEGER, routeId INTEGER);
TABLE2 (routeId INTEGER, cityId INTEGER);
There are indexes on all 4 columns.
(routeId on TABLE1 is a primary key).
In the data I am using, a given search has more than 500 routes, each route has between 10 and 300 cities among more than 4000 possible different cities.
Now, what I want to create is the list of route couple, within a certain search, that do not have a single city in common.
That list should populate a table with the following structure
TABLE3 (searchId INTEGER, routeId1 INTEGER, routeId2 INTEGER)
Here is the fastest select statement I have found so far.
SELECT :searchId, t1.routeId, t2.routeId FROM table1 t1, table1 t2
WHERE t1.searchId=:searchId AND t2.searchId=:searchId
AND t1.routeId>t2.routeId
AND NOT EXISTS (
SELECT cityId FROM table2
WHERE routeId=t1.routeId
INTERSECT
SELECT cityId FROM table2
WHERE routeId=t2.routeId);
But it still seem really slow to me.
Any suggestion for an improved version is welcome.
Thanks,
Martin.
Title was edited by:
user453358

I originaly posted this thread because I tought I was missing something "obvious" that would perform better that would make my SELECT statement perform better.
So I did not want to go as deep as using TKPROOF yet.
Here is the statistics I gets on my statement.
1   SELECT t1.searchId,t1.routeId, t2.routeId id2
2      FROM table1 t1, table1 t2
3     WHERE t1.searchid=t2.searchid
4      AND t1.searchId=91
5      AND t1.routeId>t2.routeId
6      AND NOT EXISTS (
7             SELECT cityId FROM table2
8              WHERE routeId=t1.routeId
9             INTERSECT
10             SELECT cityId FROM table2
11*            WHERE routeId=t2.routeId)
SQL> /
43302 rows.
Tidsåtgång: 00:01:55.02
Körschema
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=9 Card=1 Bytes=14)
   1    0   FILTER
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'table1' (TABLE) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=7)
   3    2       NESTED LOOPS (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=14)
   4    3         TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'table1' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=7)
   5    4           INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'table1_IDX1' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=1)
   6    3         INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'table1_IDX1' (INDEX) (Cost=0 Card=1)
   7    1     INTERSECTION
   8    7       SORT (UNIQUE) (Cost=3 Card=108 Bytes=864)
   9    8         TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'table2' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=108 Bytes=864)
10    9           INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'table2_IDX1' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=108)
11    7       SORT (UNIQUE) (Cost=3 Card=108 Bytes=864)
12   11         TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'table2' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=108 Bytes=864)
13   12           INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'table2_IDX1' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=108)
Statistik
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
    2872765 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
        812 redo size
     964172 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      32245 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       2888 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
     860256 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      43302 rows processed Looks like a big number of consistent gets! Any idea how to improve on that?
Martin.

Increase performance of the following SELECT statement.

Hi All,
I have the following select statement which I would want to fine tune.
CHECK NOT LT_MARC IS INITIAL.
SELECT RSNUM
         RSPOS
         RSART
         MATNR
         WERKS
         BDTER
         BDMNG FROM RESB
                      INTO TABLE GT_RESB
                      FOR ALL ENTRIES IN LT_MARC
                      WHERE XLOEK EQ ' '
                      AND MATNR EQ LT_MARC-MATNR
                      AND WERKS EQ P_WERKS
                      AND BDTER IN S_PERIOD.
The following query is being run for a period of 1 year where the number of records returned will be approx 3 million. When the program is run in background the execution time is around 76 hours. When I run the same program dividing the selection period into smaller parts I am able to execute the same in about an hour.
After a previous posting I had changed the select statement to
CHECK NOT LT_MARC IS INITIAL.
SELECT RSNUM
         RSPOS
         RSART
         MATNR
         WERKS
         BDTER
         BDMNG FROM RESB
                      APPENDING TABLE GT_RESB PACKAGE SIZE LV_SIZE
                      FOR ALL ENTRIES IN LT_MARC
                      WHERE XLOEK EQ ' '
                      AND MATNR EQ LT_MARC-MATNR
                      AND WERKS EQ P_WERKS
                      AND BDTER IN S_PERIOD.
ENDSELECT.
But the performance improvement is very negligible.
Please suggest.
Regards,
Karthik

Hi Karthik,
<b>Do not use the appending statement</b>
Also you said if you reduce period then you get it quickly.
Why not try dividing your internal table LT_MARC into small internal tables having max 1000 entries.
You can read from index 1 - 1000 for first table. Use that in the select query and append the results
Then you can refresh that table and read table LT_MARC from 1001-2000 into the same table and then again execute the same query.
I know this sounds strange but you can bargain for better performance by increasing data base hits in this case.
Try this and let me know.
Regards
Nishant
> I have the following select statement which I would
> want to fine tune.
>
>   CHECK NOT LT_MARC IS INITIAL.
> SELECT RSNUM
>          RSPOS
> RSART
>          MATNR
> WERKS
>          BDTER
> BDMNG FROM RESB
>                       INTO TABLE GT_RESB
> FOR ALL ENTRIES IN LT_MARC
>                       WHERE XLOEK EQ ' '
> AND MATNR EQ LT_MARC-MATNR
>                       AND WERKS EQ P_WERKS
> AND BDTER IN S_PERIOD.
>
> e following query is being run for a period of 1 year
> where the number of records returned will be approx 3
> million. When the program is run in background the
> execution time is around 76 hours. When I run the
> same program dividing the selection period into
> smaller parts I am able to execute the same in about
> an hour.
>
> After a previous posting I had changed the select
> statement to
>
>   CHECK NOT LT_MARC IS INITIAL.
> SELECT RSNUM
>          RSPOS
> RSART
>          MATNR
> WERKS
>          BDTER
> BDMNG FROM RESB
> APPENDING TABLE GT_RESB
>   PACKAGE SIZE LV_SIZE
>                     FOR ALL ENTRIES IN LT_MARC
>   WHERE XLOEK EQ ' '
>                     AND MATNR EQ LT_MARC-MATNR
>   AND WERKS EQ P_WERKS
>                     AND BDTER IN S_PERIOD.
> the performance improvement is very negligible.
> Please suggest.
>
> Regards,
> Karthik
Hi Karthik,

Performance Tuning -To find the execution time for Select Statement

Hi,
There is a program that takes 10 hrs to execute. I need tune its performance. The program is basically reading few tables like KNA1,ANLA,ANLU,ADRC etc and updates to Custom table. I did my analysis and found few performance techniques for ABAP coding.
Now my problem is, to get this object approved I need to submit the execution statistics to client.I checked both ST05 and SE30. I heard of a Tcode where we can execute a select statement and note its time, then modify and find its improved Performance. Can anybody suggest me on this.
Thanks,
Rajani.

Hi,
This is documentation regarding performance analysis. Hope this will be useful
It is a general practice to use           Select * from <database>     This statement populates all the values of the structure in the database.
The effect is many fold:-
     It increases the time to retrieve data from database
     There is large amount of unused data in memory
     It increases the processing time from work area or internal tables
It is always a good practice to retrieve only the required fields. Always use the syntax      Select f1 f2 fn from <database>
e.g.     Do not use the following statement:-
     Data: i_mara like mara occurs 0 with header line.
     Data: i_marc like marc occurs 0 with header line.
     Select * from mara
          Into table i_mara
          Where matnr in s_matnr.
     Select * from marc
          Into table i_marc
          For all entries in i_mara
          Where matnr eq i_mara-matnr.
     Instead use the following statement:-
                                   Data: begin of i_mara occurs 0,
                                        Matnr like mara-matnr,
                                              End of i_mara.
     Data: begin of i_marc occurs 0,
          Matnr like marc-matnr,
                                        Werks like marc-werks,
                                             End of i_marc.
     Select matnr from mara
          Into table i_mara
          Where matnr in s_matnr.

Select query and Insert statement performance

Hi all,
Can anyone plz guide us on below problem I am facing ?
1) One of the simple Insert statement runs very slow..What might be the reason? Its simple table without any LOBs ,LONG or so. Everything else in the DB works fine.
2) one of the SELECT statement runs very slow. It selects all records (around 1000) from a table..How can i improve its performance?
3)Which columns in the Master and its detail tables should be indexed to improve Query performance on them.
Many Thanks
Regards
sandeep

To get an answer to your questions you have to post some informations about your system:
1. operating system
2. RAM
3. oracle version
4. init.ora
Thomas

Need to Improve pefromance for select statement using MSEG table

Hi all,
We are using a select statement using MSEG table
which takes a very long time to run the program which is scheduled in back ground.
Please see the history below.;
1) Previously this program was using SELECT-ENDSELECT statement inside the loop i.e.
LOOP AT I_MCHB.
To get Material Doc. Details
      SELECT MBLNR
             MJAHR
             ZEILE INTO (MSEG-MBLNR,MSEG-MJAHR,MSEG-ZEILE)
             UP TO 1 ROWS
             FROM MSEG
            WHERE CHARG EQ I_MCHB-CHARG
             AND MATNR EQ I_MCHB-MATNR
             AND WERKS EQ I_MCHB-WERKS
             AND LGORT EQ I_MCHB-LGORT.
      ENDSELECT.
Endloop.
The program was taking 1 hr for 20 k data
2)The above statement was replaced by ALL ENTRIES to remove the SELECT-ENDSELECT from the loop.
***GET MATERIAL DOC NUMBER AND FINANCIAL YEAR DETAILS FROM MSEG TABLE
    SELECT MBLNR
           MJAHR
           ZEILE
           MATNR
           CHARG
           WERKS
           LGORT
               INTO TABLE I_MSEG
               FROM   MSEG
               FOR ALL ENTRIES IN I_MCHB
               WHERE CHARG EQ I_MCHB-CHARG
               AND   MATNR EQ I_MCHB-MATNR
               AND   WERKS EQ I_MCHB-WERKS
               AND   LGORT EQ I_MCHB-LGORT.
3)After getting the further technical analysis from BASIS team , And with the suggestion to optimize the program by changing the INDEX RANGE SCAN to
       MSEG~M.
SELECT MBLNR
           MJAHR
           ZEILE
           MATNR
           CHARG
           WERKS
           LGORT
               INTO TABLE I_MSEG
               FROM   MSEG
               FOR ALL ENTRIES IN I_MCHB
               WHERE MATNR EQ I_MCHB-MATNR
               AND   WERKS EQ I_MCHB-WERKS
               AND   LGORT EQ I_MCHB-LGORT.
At present the program is taking 3 to 4 hrs in back ground .
The table is complete table scan using index
MSEG~M.
Please suggest to improve the performance of this
many many thanks
deepak

The benchmark should be the join, and I can not see how any of your solutions can be faster than the join
SELECT   .....
              INTO TABLE ....
              UP TO 1 ROWS
              FROM mchb as a
              INNER JOIN mseg as b
              ON    amatnr EQ bmatnr
              AND awerks EQ bwerks
              AND algort    EQ blgort
              And   acharg EQ bcharg
              WHERE a~ ....
The WHERE condition must come from the select on MCHB, the field list from the total results
you want.
If you want to compare, must compare your solutions plus the select to fill I_MCHB.
Siegfried
Edited by: Siegfried Boes on Dec 20, 2007 2:28 PM

How to improve select stmt performance without going for secondary index

Hi friends,
I have a select statement which does not contains key fields(Primary index) in where condition. And I have to improve that select stmt performance without going for the secondary indexes.
Can you plese suggest the alternative way for this?.
Thanks in advance,
Ramesh.

Hi,
If , possible create a secondary index opf your own But if you have restriction on this, try to arrange the fields in where clause in the same order as they appear in the very table.
This will help the performance a bit.
Another issue, If your table doesn't contain any critical data or data in them are not updated frequently, you may go for Bufferring . it is a good alternate of Indexing with above limitations.
For details in bufferring , check, and all the sublinks.
[concept of buffering|http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/cf/21f244446011d189700000e8322d00/content.htm]
Regards,
Anirban

"Check Statistics" in the Performance tab. How to see SELECT statement?

Hi,
In a previous mail on SDN, it was explained (see below) that the "Check Statistics" in the Performance tab, under Manage in the context of a cube, executes the SELECT stament below.
Would you happen to know how to see the SELECT statements that the "Check Statistics" command executes as mentioned in the posting below?
Thanks
====================================
When you hit the Check Statistics tab, it isn't just the fact tables that are checked, but also all master data tables for all the InfoObjects (characteristics) that are in the cubes dimensions.
Checking nbr of rows inserted, last analyzed dates, etc.
SELECT
T.TABLE_NAME, M.PARTITION_NAME, TO_CHAR (T.LAST_ANALYZED, 'YYYYMMDDHH24MISS'), T.NUM_ROWS,
M.INSERTS, M.UPDATES, M.DELETES, M.TRUNCATED
FROM
USER_TABLES T LEFT OUTER JOIN USER_TAB_MODIFICATIONS M ON T.TABLE_NAME = M.TABLE_NAME
WHERE
T.TABLE_NAME = '/BI0/PWBS_ELEMT' AND M.PARTITION_NAME IS NULL
When you Refresh the stats, all the tables that need stats refreshed, are refreshed again. SInce InfoCube queries access the various master data tables in quereis, it makes sense that SAP would check their status.
In looking at some of the results in 7.0, I'm not sure that the 30 day check is being doen as it was in 3.5. This is one area SAP retooled quite a bit.
Yellow only indicates that there could be a problem. You could have stale DB stats on a table, but if they don't cause the DB optimizer to choose a poor execution plan, then it has no impact.
Good DB stats are vital to query performance and old stats could be responsible for poor performance. I'm just syaing that the Statistics check yellow light status is not a definitive indicator.
If your DBA has BRCONNECT running daily, you really should not have to worry about stats collection on the BW side except in cases immediately after large loads /deletes, and the nightly BRCONNECT hasn't run.
BRCONNECT should produce a lof every time it runs showing you all the tables that it determeined should have stats refreshed. That might be worth a review. It should be running daily. If it is not being run, then you need to look at running stats collection from the BW side, either in Process Chains or via InfoCube automatisms.
Best bet is to use ST04 to get Explain Plans of a poor running InfoCube query and then it can be reviewed to see where the time is being spent and whether stats ate a culprit.

Hi,
Thanks, this is what I came up with:
st05,
check SQL Trace, Activate Trace
Now, in Rsa1
on Cube, Cube1,
Manage, Performance tab, Check Statistics
Again, back to st05
Deactivate Trace
then click on Displace Trace
Now, in the trace display, after scanning through the output,
how do I see the SELECT statements that the "Check Statistics" command executes
I will appreciate your help.

Select statement performance improvement.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for