Serious performance issue with LV 7.1 Development Environment

I'm posting this issue to the forums prior to submitting a bug report to ensure that the problems I'm having are reproducible. To reproduce this bug, you're going to have to be an advanced user with a large project (hundreds to thousands of VIs) as the performance problem is related to the number of VIs loaded.
The issue is the increasingly poor performance of the LabVIEW 7.1 Development Environment as the number of VIs in memory increases. The actions affected include switching between front panel and diagram, saving a VI, copy and paste, clicking a menu, and the mysterious time spent (compiling? editing the runtime menu? changing the toolbar state?) between pressing the run button and when the code actually starts executing. Scrolling and, interestingly, copying via a control-drag are not affected. Running time of entirely on-diagram code does not seem to be affected.
These problems are quite severe and significantly decrease my productivity as a programmer. Since they are development environment UI issues, it's been difficult for me to find a good example VI; the best I can do is the attached "LV Speed Test.vi". It doesn't test the issues that affect me most, but it seems to suffer from the same problem.
This simple VI just shows and hides the menu bar 100 times in a tight for loop. When it is the only VI loaded, it executes in about 350 msec on my machine. (2.4 GHz P-IV/640 MB RAM/Win2k). However, when I load a single project-encompassing VI (let's call it the "giant") that references a total of about 900 user and VI-lib subVIs, the test routine takes almost a minute and half to run...about 240 times slower! I've tried this on my laptop with similar results.
The problem appears to be related to the *number* of VIs loaded and not the memory utilization. For example, if I close the "giant", and create a new VI ("memhog") that does nothing but initialize a length 20,000,000 array of doubles and stores it in an uninitialized shift register, LabView's overall memory usage (as shown in the task manager) jumps enormously, but LV Speed Test executes in about 450 msec...only slightly slower than with a fresh copy of Labview.
The problem seems to be related to excessive context switching. The Windows task manager shows over a thirteen hundred page faults occur when "LV Speed Test" is run with the "giant" in the background, versus zero or none when run by itself or when "memhog" has used up 160+MB of space.
The problem only seems to affect the frontmost window. (Unfortunately, that's where we LV programmers spend all of our time!) If you start "LV Speed Test" and then put "giant" in the foreground "LV Speed Test" runs much faster. In fact, if you use the VI server to put the "giant" VI in the foreground programmatically at the start of "LV Speed Test", execution time drops back to 450 msec, and there are no page faults!
These results show the issue is not related to video drivers or the Windows virtual memory system. My suspicion is that there is a faulty routine in LV 7.1 that is traversing the entire VI hierarchy every time certain events are thrown in the foreground window. It could be due to a problem with the Windows event tracking system, but this seems less likely.
I have been programming LV for about 7 years and switched from LV 6.1 to 7.1 about four months ago. I know NI engineers have put thousands of hours developing and testing LV 7.1, but honestly I find myself wishing I had never upgraded from using LV 6.1. (To whomever thought "hide trailing zeros" should be the default for floating point controls...what were you thinking?!)
I know each new version of LabView causes old-timers like me to grouse that things were better back in the days when we etched our block diagrams on stone tablets, etc., and honestly I'm not going to go back. I am committed to LabView 7.1. I just wish it were not so slow on my big projects!
Attachments:
LV_Speed_Test.vi ‏22 KB

Hi,
I can confirm this behavior. Setting the execution system to "user
interface" helps a bit, but there is still a big difference.
I get a feeling it has something to do with window messages, perhaps
WM_PAINT or something, that is handled differently if a VI is not
frontmost... But what do I know...
Don't know if it should be called a bug, but it sure is something that could
be optimized.
Regards,
Wiebe.
"Rob Calhoun" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm posting this issue to the forums prior to submitting a bug report
> to ensure that the problems I'm having are reproducible. To reproduce
> this bug, you're going to have to be an advanced user with a large
> project (hundreds to thousands of VIs) as the performance problem is
> related to the number of VIs loaded.
>
> The issue is the increasingly poor performance of the LabVIEW 7.1
> Development Environment as the number of VIs in memory increases. The
> actions affected include switching between front panel and diagram,
> saving a VI, copy and paste, clicking a menu, and the mysterious time
> spent (compiling? editing the runtime menu? changing the toolbar
> state?) between pressing the run button and when the code actually
> starts executing. Scrolling and, interestingly, copying via a
> control-drag are not affected. Running time of entirely on-diagram
> code does not seem to be affected.
>
> These problems are quite severe and significantly decrease my
> productivity as a programmer. Since they are development environment
> UI issues, it's been difficult for me to find a good example VI; the
> best I can do is the attached "LV Speed Test.vi". It doesn't test the
> issues that affect me most, but it seems to suffer from the same
> problem.
>
> This simple VI just shows and hides the menu bar 100 times in a tight
> for loop. When it is the only VI loaded, it executes in about 350 msec
> on my machine. (2.4 GHz P-IV/640 MB RAM/Win2k). However, when I load a
> single project-encompassing VI (let's call it the "giant") that
> references a total of about 900 user and VI-lib subVIs, the test
> routine takes almost a minute and half to run...about 240 times
> slower! I've tried this on my laptop with similar results.
>
> The problem appears to be related to the *number* of VIs loaded and
> not the memory utilization. For example, if I close the "giant", and
> create a new VI ("memhog") that does nothing but initialize a length
> 20,000,000 array of doubles and stores it in an uninitialized shift
> register, LabView's overall memory usage (as shown in the task
> manager) jumps enormously, but LV Speed Test executes in about 450
> msec...only slightly slower than with a fresh copy of Labview.
>
> The problem seems to be related to excessive context switching. The
> Windows task manager shows over a thirteen hundred page faults occur
> when "LV Speed Test" is run with the "giant" in the background, versus
> zero or none when run by itself or when "memhog" has used up 160+MB of
> space.
>
> The problem only seems to affect the frontmost window. (Unfortunately,
> that's where we LV programmers spend all of our time!) If you start
> "LV Speed Test" and then put "giant" in the foreground "LV Speed Test"
> runs much faster. In fact, if you use the VI server to put the "giant"
> VI in the foreground programmatically at the start of "LV Speed Test",
> execution time drops back to 450 msec, and there are no page faults!
>
> These results show the issue is not related to video drivers or the
> Windows virtual memory system. My suspicion is that there is a faulty
> routine in LV 7.1 that is traversing the entire VI hierarchy every
> time certain events are thrown in the foreground window. It could be
> due to a problem with the Windows event tracking system, but this
> seems less likely.
>
> I have been programming LV for about 7 years and switched from LV 6.1
> to 7.1 about four months ago. I know NI engineers have put thousands
> of hours developing and testing LV 7.1, but honestly I find myself
> wishing I had never upgraded from using LV 6.1. (To whomever thought
> "hide trailing zeros" should be the default for floating point
> controls...what were you thinking?!)
>
> I know each new version of LabView causes old-timers like me to grouse
> that things were better back in the days when we etched our block
> diagrams on stone tablets, etc., and honestly I'm not going to go
> back. I am committed to LabView 7.1. I just wish it were not so slow
> on my big projects!

Similar Messages

  • Serious performance issues with no solution in sight

    I hate to be in such desperate need of help, but these forums have been extraordinarily helpful before, so I'm hoping someone will be able to help me with this series of problems.
    I honestly don't know how to describe the problem beyond that it seems like the computer is coming apart.
    The problem started about a week and a half, maybe two weeks, ago. I was having problems with Safari at first. Every time I used it, I would get the spinning ball, and it would take several minutes to open. If Safari was opened, the computer seemed to just lock up. No other applications could be opened, and no folders could be used. On top of that, whenever that spinning ball appeared, a series of clicking sounds could be heard coming from the upper left hand portion of the laptop (not the screen). The only way I could make it stop was to force quit (and even that was a luck of the draw issue).
    I took the computer in to be checked out, but their scans and tests showed the same results as mine: nothing is wrong. The problem has since spread beyond Safari, which I ended up erasing from my computer. That same rhythmic clicking happens whenever the spinning ball appears. I have tried to find some kind of pattern to the sound/spinning ball, but have thus far been unsuccessful.
    It has happened when using iTunes, saving with appleworks, having AOL instant messenger open, using Firefox, using quicktime. Whenever it happens, my system basically locks up and renders all applications useless. Force quitting is the only way I can get things going again, and even then it can take several minutes for me to even be able to force quit.
    Also, software updates quit before I can download them.
    I apologize for the long post, but I want to try and provide as much information as possible.
    To me this sounds like a failing hard drive, and that is what the tech thought, but the tests just show nothing is wrong, and I cannot comprehend why.
    My many thanks in advance for any help you can provide.

    Hi Samuel,
    I will agree that louder than normal clicking is a sign of something wrong with the hard drive. But you might just be hearing the hard drive working normally, it just might be doing it a lot more.
    If you haven't tried a permissions repair, try one. It's worth a try, and I have known it to improve the performance of my Macs to some extent.
    Also, if you have access to it, Try DiskWarrior. DiskWarrior is a program that will take your hard drive and rebuild the directory for it, clearing up errors and improving overall performance.
    If you've got the means to do this, try reformatting your system. It's a lot of work, I'll admit, but perhaps something got corrupted and it could be messing up your performance.
    Another thing you can try is to boot OS X from some sort of external hard drive (if you happen to have a friend who happens to own an external hard drive with OS X on it... wait, am I the only one??? darn.) and see if the problem exists when running off the other drive. If you don't happen to have such a hard drive (I mean, everyone's got a spare external hard drive with OS X installed on it, don't they?) you can simply boot a friend's Mac in FireWire target disk mode (boot the computer while holding T key), connect the 2 computers, and boot your system from the friend's hard drive (by holding the option key at startup). Of course, if none of your friends own Macs, you need to find better friends!
    Basically, though, if your computer successfully boots from one of these other systems and doesn't exhibit these symptoms, then it's something with your hard drive. Try first to reformat (or at least re-install OS X), and if that doesn't work, you'll have to do a repair.
    If you have to resort to calling tech support, I'll bet you $10,000 that they're going to ask you to reset the PMU and/or the PRAM on your system. Your computer could have dirt on it, and they'd have you reset the PRAM and the PMU.

  • ERP Sales Order : Performance issues with Product Proposal

    Hi
    we are working on CRM 2007 solution and are facing serious performance issues with the ERP Sales Order functionality provided in the ICWC of this version.
    In our development we are adding items in the ERP cart as soon as the user clicks on the 'New Sales Order' button of the sales order sreen. We get the items by very simple and optimized call to the ERP system and then add these entities in the Item Cart (Item collection ...in simple sense).
    For adding 10 items the application takes 10 seconds and this is too much for adding just 10 items.
    Can you please provide any Notes/alternative solution to resolve this issue.
    Regards
    Ajitabh

    Hi Ajithabh,
    Please apply the following SAP notes:
    1061423 - Interaction Center ERP Order Performance improvement
    1262277 - Performance: CRM value help causes dumps in ERP
    1292817 - Performance: Reduce RFC calls during creation of ERP order.
    1319885 - ERP sales order search with external reference
    1326527 - Reducing number of RFC calls in IC ERP Sales Order
    I hope it helps!
    Regards,
    Gabriel Santana

  • Performance Issues with large XML (1-1.5MB) files

    Hi,
    I'm using an XML Schema based Object relational storage for my XML documents which are typically 1-1.5 MB in size and having serious performance issues with XPath Query.
    When I do XPath query against an element of SQLType varchar2, I get a good performance. But when I do a similar XPath query against an element of SQLType Collection (Varray of varchar2), I get a very ordinary performance.
    I have also created indexes on extract() and analyzed my XMLType table and indexes, but I have no performance gain. Also, I have tried all sorts of storage options available for Collections ie. Varray's, Nested Tables, IOT's, LOB's, Inline, etc... and all these gave me same bad performance.
    I even tried creating XMLType views based on XPath queries but the performance didn't improve much.
    I guess I'm running out of options and patience as well.;)
    I would appreciate any ideas/suggestions, please help.....
    Thanks;
    Ramakrishna Chinta

    Are you having similar symptoms as I am? http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2234792&tstart=0

  • Performance issues with Oracle EE 9.2.0.4 and RedHat 2.1

    Hello,
    I am having some serious performance issues with Oracle Enterprise Edition 9.2.0.4 and RedHat Linux 2.1. The processor goes berserk at 100% for long (some 5 min.) periods of time, and all the ram memory gets used.
    Some environment characteristics:
    Machine: Intel Pentium IV 2.0GHz with 1GB of RAM.
    OS: RedHat Linux 2.1 Enterprise.
    Oracle: Oracle Enterprise Edition 9.2.0.4
    Application: We have a small web-application with 10 users (for now) and very basic queries (all in stored procedures). Also we use the latest version of ODP.NET with default connection settings (some low pooling, etc).
    Does anyone know what could be going on?
    Is anybody else having this similar behavior?
    We change from SQL-Server so we are not the world expert on the matter. But we want a reliable system nonetheless.
    Please help us out, gives some tips, tricks, or guides…
    Thanks to all,
    Frank

    Thank you very much and sorry I couldn’t write sooner. It seems that the administrator doesn’t see the kswap going on so much, so I don’t really know what is going on.
    We are looking at some queries and some indexing but this is nuts, if I had some poor queries, which we don’t really, the server would show pick right?
    But he goes crazy and has two oracle processes taking all the resources. There seems to be little swapping going on.
    Son now what? They are all ready talking about MS-SQL please help me out here, this is crazy!!!
    We have, may be the most powerful combinations here. What is oracle doing?
    We even kill the Working Process of the IIS and have no one do anything with the database and still dose two processes going on.
    Can some one help me?
    Thanks,
    Frank

  • Performance Issue with BSIS(open accounting items)

    Hey All,
          I am having serious performance issue with a accrual report which gets all open GL items, and need some tips for optimization.
    The main issue is that I am accesing large tables like BSIS, BSEG, BSAS etc without proper indexes and that I am dealing with huge amounts of data.
    The select itself take a long time and after that as I have so much data overall execution is slow too.
    The select which concerns me the most is:
      SELECT zuonr hkont gjahr belnr buzei budat blart wrbtr shkzg xblnr waers bukrs
                 INTO TABLE i_bsis
                  FROM bsis
                  WHERE bukrs = '1000'
                  AND hkont in r_hkont   
                  AND budat <= p_lcdate
                  AND augdt = 0
                  AND augbl = space
                  AND gsber = c_ZRL1   
                  AND gjahr BETWEEN l_gjahr2 AND l_gjahr
                  AND ( blart = c_re      "Invoice
                  OR    blart = c_we      "Goods receipt
                  OR    blart = c_zc      "Invoice Cancels
                  OR    blart = c_kp ).   "Accounting offset
    I have seen other related threads, but was not that helpful.
    We already have a secondary index on bukrs hkont and budat, and i have checked in ST05 that it does use it. But inspite that it takes more than 15 hrs to complete(maybe because of huge data).
    Any Input is highly appreciated.
    Thanks

    Thank you Thomas for your inputs:
    You said that R_HKONT contains several ranges of account numbers. If these ranges cover a significant
    portion of the overall existing account numbers, then there is no really quick access possible via the
    BSIS primary key.
    Unfortunately R_HKONT contains all account numbers.
    As Rob said, your index on HKONT and BUDAT does not help much, since you are selecting "<=" on
    BUDAT. No chance of narrowing down that range?
    Will look into this.
    What about GSBER? Does the value in c_ZRL1 provide a rather small subset of the overall values? Then
    an index on BUKRS and GSBER might be helpful.
    ZRL1 does provide a decent selection . But I dont know if one more index is a good idea on overall
    system performance.
    I assume that the four document types are not very selective, so it probably does not pay off to
    investigate selecting on BKPF (there is an index involving BLART) and joining BSIS for the additional
    information. You still might want to look into it though.
    I did try to investigate this option too. Based on other threads related to BSIS and Robs Suggestion in
    those threads I tried this:
    SELECT bukrs belnr gjahr blart budat
      FROM bkpf INTO TABLE bkpf_l
            WHERE bukrs = c_pepsico
            AND bstat IN (' ', 'A', 'B', 'D', 'M', 'S', 'V', 'W', 'Z')
            AND blart IN ('RE', 'WE', 'ZC', 'KP')
            AND gjahr BETWEEN l_gjahr2 AND l_gjahr
            AND budat <= p_lcdate.
    SELECT zuonr hkont gjahr belnr buzei budat blart wrbtr shkzg xblnr waers bukrs
               FROM bsis INTO TABLE i_bsis FOR ALL ENTRIES IN bkpf_l
                         WHERE bukrs = bkpf_l-bukrs
                          AND  hkont IN r_hkont
                          AND  budat = bkpf_l-budat
                          AND  augdt = 0
                          AND  augbl = space
                          AND  gjahr = bkpf_l-gjahr
                          AND  belnr = bkpf_l-belnr
                          AND  blart = bkpf_l-blart
                          AND  gsber = c_zrl1.
    The improves the select on BSIS a lot, but the first select on BKPF kills it. Not sure if this would help
    improve performance.
    Also I was wondering whether it helps on refreshing the tabe statistics through DB20. The last refresh
    was done 7 months back. How frequently should we do this? Will it help?

  • Performance issue with view selection after migration from oracle to MaxDb

    Hello,
    After the migration from oracle to MaxDb we have serious performance issues with a lot of our tableview selections.
    Does anybody know about this problem and how to solve it ??
    Best regards !!!
    Gert-Jan

    Hello Gert-Jan,
    most probably you need additional indexes to get better performance.
    Using the command monitor you can identify the long running SQL statements and check the optimizer access strategy. Then you can decide which indexes might help.
    If this is about an SAP system, you can find additional information about performance analysis in SAP notes 725489 and 819641.
    SAP Hosting provides the so-called service 'MaxDB Migration Support' to help you in such cases. The service description can be found here:
    http://www.saphosting.de/mediacenter/pdfs/solutionbriefs/MaxDB_de.pdf
    http://www.saphosting.com/mediacenter/pdfs/solutionbriefs/maxDB-migration-support_en.pdf.
    Best regards,
    Melanie Handreck

  • Performance issue with BW Extractor 0CRM_SRV_PROCESS_H

    Hi There,
    We have a serious performance issue with BW extractor 0CRM_SRV_PROCESS_H in CRM .  We recently applied SAP Note: 1330249 to optimise the performance, Even after applying the note it remains slow, Please can any one update the solution if they had same issue with this Extractor or know about this issue.
    Thanks,
    R

    Hi Ramesh,
    There are some instructions available in note 1330249 that shoul help you.
    I don't know what is the current release in the system, but there are corrections to be implemented by Tcode SNOTE and also manual steps(in table SMOFPARSFA).
    I hope it contributes.
    Regards,
    Sinara Moraes

  • Performance issues with pipelined table functions

    I am testing pipelined table functions to be able to re-use the <font face="courier">base_query</font> function. Contrary to my understanding, the <font face="courier">with_pipeline</font> procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy <font face="courier">no_pipeline</font> procedure. Am I missing something? The <font face="courier">processor</font> function is from [url http://www.oracle-developer.net/display.php?id=429]improving performance with pipelined table functions .
    Edit: The underlying query returns 500,000 rows in about 3 minutes. So there are are no performance issues with the query itself.
    Many thanks in advance.
    CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE pipeline_example
    IS
       TYPE resultset_typ IS REF CURSOR;
       TYPE row_typ IS RECORD (colC VARCHAR2(200), colD VARCHAR2(200), colE VARCHAR2(200));
       TYPE table_typ IS TABLE OF row_typ;
       FUNCTION base_query (argA IN VARCHAR2, argB IN VARCHAR2)
          RETURN resultset_typ;
       c_default_limit   CONSTANT PLS_INTEGER := 100;  
       FUNCTION processor (
          p_source_data   IN resultset_typ,
          p_limit_size    IN PLS_INTEGER DEFAULT c_default_limit)
          RETURN table_typ
          PIPELINED
          PARALLEL_ENABLE(PARTITION p_source_data BY ANY);
       PROCEDURE with_pipeline (argA          IN     VARCHAR2,
                                argB          IN     VARCHAR2,
                                o_resultset      OUT resultset_typ);
       PROCEDURE no_pipeline (argA          IN     VARCHAR2,
                              argB          IN     VARCHAR2,
                              o_resultset      OUT resultset_typ);
    END pipeline_example;
    CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE BODY pipeline_example
    IS
       FUNCTION base_query (argA IN VARCHAR2, argB IN VARCHAR2)
          RETURN resultset_typ
       IS
          o_resultset   resultset_typ;
       BEGIN
          OPEN o_resultset FOR
             SELECT colC, colD, colE
               FROM some_table
              WHERE colA = ArgA AND colB = argB;
          RETURN o_resultset;
       END base_query;
       FUNCTION processor (
          p_source_data   IN resultset_typ,
          p_limit_size    IN PLS_INTEGER DEFAULT c_default_limit)
          RETURN table_typ
          PIPELINED
          PARALLEL_ENABLE(PARTITION p_source_data BY ANY)
       IS
          aa_source_data   table_typ;-- := table_typ ();
       BEGIN
          LOOP
             FETCH p_source_data
             BULK COLLECT INTO aa_source_data
             LIMIT p_limit_size;
             EXIT WHEN aa_source_data.COUNT = 0;
             /* Process the batch of (p_limit_size) records... */
             FOR i IN 1 .. aa_source_data.COUNT
             LOOP
                PIPE ROW (aa_source_data (i));
             END LOOP;
          END LOOP;
          CLOSE p_source_data;
          RETURN;
       END processor;
       PROCEDURE with_pipeline (argA          IN     VARCHAR2,
                                argB          IN     VARCHAR2,
                                o_resultset      OUT resultset_typ)
       IS
       BEGIN
          OPEN o_resultset FOR
               SELECT /*+ PARALLEL(t, 5) */ colC,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colD > colE AND colE != '0' THEN colD / ColE END)de,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colE > colD AND colD != '0' THEN colE / ColD END)ed,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colD = colE AND colD != '0' THEN '1' END) de_one,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colD = '0' OR colE = '0' THEN '0' END) de_zero
                 FROM TABLE (processor (base_query (argA, argB),100)) t
             GROUP BY colC
             ORDER BY colC
       END with_pipeline;
       PROCEDURE no_pipeline (argA          IN     VARCHAR2,
                              argB          IN     VARCHAR2,
                              o_resultset      OUT resultset_typ)
       IS
       BEGIN
          OPEN o_resultset FOR
               SELECT colC,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colD > colE AND colE  != '0' THEN colD / ColE END)de,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colE > colD AND colD  != '0' THEN colE / ColD END)ed,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colD = colE AND colD  != '0' THEN 1 END) de_one,
                      SUM (CASE WHEN colD = '0' OR colE = '0' THEN '0' END) de_zero
                 FROM (SELECT colC, colD, colE
                         FROM some_table
                        WHERE colA = ArgA AND colB = argB)
             GROUP BY colC
             ORDER BY colC;
       END no_pipeline;
    END pipeline_example;
    ALTER PACKAGE pipeline_example COMPILE;Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 14, 2010 9:47 AM
    Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 14, 2010 11:31 AM
    Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 14, 2010 11:32 AM
    Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 20, 2010 12:04 PM
    Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 20, 2010 12:54 PM

    Earthlink wrote:
    Contrary to my understanding, the <font face="courier">with_pipeline</font> procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy <font face="courier">no_pipeline</font> procedure. Am I missing something? Well, we're missing a lot here.
    Like:
    - a database version
    - how did you test
    - what data do you have, how is it distributed, indexed
    and so on.
    If you want to find out what's going on then use a TRACE with wait events.
    All nessecary steps are explained in these threads:
    HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
    http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
    Another nice one is RUNSTATS:
    http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/ASKTOM.download_file?p_file=6551378329289980701

  • Performance issue with using buffering in a APPL0 or APPL1 Table

    Hi,
    Can anyone please tell me whether there's any serious performace issue with using buffering for a Master or Transaction table? I'm asking this because when I run code inspector for my transp table I'm getting information message:
    Message Code 0011 ==> Buffereing is Activated but Delivery Class Is "A" and Message Code 0014 ==> Buffereing is Activated but Data Class Is "APPL1".
    So what's other way round for improving performance.
    Thanks,
    Mahesh M.S.

    Hi,
    have you read the documentation?
    Let me paste it here for you:
    Buffering is switched on for the examined table and it has data type 'APPL0' or 'APPL1'.
    Tables with data type 'APPL0' or 'APPL1' should contain master or transaction data, so these tables should either contain a large amount of data or their content should change frequently. Therefore buffering the table is unfavourable. Very large tables suppress other tables in the buffer memory and hence slow done any access to them. Transaction data should not be buffered because the synchronization of the changes on the various application servers is very time consuming.
    In exceptional cases, small master data tables ('APPL0', size category 0) can be buffered.
    The solution depends on the table content. If it is master or transaction data, the table should not be buffered. If the table content does not consist of master or transaction data, the data type should be corrected accordingly.
    This should answer your questions...
    Kind regards,
    Hermann

  • SAP DS 1.3: Performance issues with crosstab planning (IE only)

    Hi everyone,
    because im currently developing a custom component for DS 1.3, I got in touch with the planning feature of design studio. Planning currently only works in a crosstab.
    Here I recognized a significant performance issue with the internet explorer:
    If you simply type in a new value into a cell in a crosstab, it takes ~10s to confirm it (not constant! Sometimes it takes 2s, sometimes 15s). During this 10s, it seems like the IE crashed - no response at all. Sometimes there is also a warning message on bottom ('... script is slowing down the application ...').
    Tested the same scenario with Chrome and FF - takes less than 1s to confirm.
    Whats going on here ...? Anyone experienced the same issues?
    My testing environment:
    Windows 8.1
    IE 11 (also tested emulated Ie 10 and IE 9 - same problem)
    DS 1.3.0.3.201405141058
    Local mode
    Application only contained a simple crosstab, data source based on BW 7.3 query
    Of course I deactivated all custom components while testing...
    Kind regards
    Wladimir

    Hi Tammy,
    Thanks for your reply. Of course, my IE is updated to latest version (11.0.9600.17207).
    Hopefully SP1 will fix this bug...
    Kind regards
    Wladimir

  • Performance issue with BSEG

    Hi,
              I am having serious performance issue due to BSEG table .I am having a change request in which I have to solve the performance issue with regard to BSEG. The situation was that previously they had used select * on both BKPF and BSEG. I removed the select * and selected only those fields which are required as shown below. I also tried using cursors. But the problem is happening in the TEST server where BSEG is having more than 1 crore entries. I have gone through some threads but still not able to understand how to solve this problem. Please help
    select bukrs belnr gjahr bldat bstat from bkpf into table T_BKPF_p
                                                    WHERE BUKRS IN sd_bukrs AND
                                                    BLDAT < s_bldat-low
                                                    and  BSTAT = ' ' .
    select bukrs belnr gjahr shkzg dmbtr hkont from bseg into table T_BSEG_C
                                            FOR ALL ENTRIES IN t_BKPF_p
                                            WHERE BUKRS = T_bkpf_p-bukrs
                                            AND   BELNR = T_bkpf_p-belnr
                                            AND   GJAHR = T_bkpf_p-gjahr
                                            AND   HKONT = SKB1-SAKNR.

    Hi Kunal,
    Here is my take on your issue.
    In your select statement on BKPF you are selecting every BKPF record for a specified company code and blank document status that was created before a specified date. If your company has implemented SAP 10 years ago, and your user enters todays date and leaves the company code field blank you will effectively be retrieving almost all the records from BKPF (excluding the ones created today or those with non-blank document status). This would effectively be a huge amount of data. After that you are looking for the corresponding BSEG records for all the records that you have selected in BKPF.
    My question to you is why do you need to look at all the records before a given date? Why not ask the user to enter a smaller date range and make the document date and the company code a mandatory entry? You do not have to look at 10 years worth of data especially if you are running this online (as opposed to in the background).
    Your BSEG select looks correct. There is very little that you can do except for adding BUZEI to the field list. If you use for all entries and do not include the entire primary key you could lose data.
    TABLES: bkpf,
            skb1.
    SELECT-OPTIONS: s_bldat  FOR bkpf-bldat OBLIGATORY,
                    sd_bukrs FOR bkpf-bukrs OBLIGATORY.
    TYPES: BEGIN OF ty_bkpf,
            bukrs TYPE bkpf-bukrs,
            belnr TYPE bkpf-belnr,
            gjahr TYPE bkpf-gjahr,
            bldat TYPE bkpf-bldat,
            bstat TYPE bkpf-bstat,
          END OF ty_bkpf,
          BEGIN OF ty_bseg,
            bukrs TYPE bseg-bukrs,
            belnr TYPE bseg-belnr,
            gjahr TYPE bseg-gjahr,
            buzei TYPE bseg-buzei,
            shkzg TYPE bseg-shkzg,
            dmbtr TYPE bseg-dmbtr,
            hkont TYPE bseg-hkont,
          END OF ty_bseg.
    DATA: t_bkpf_p TYPE TABLE OF ty_bkpf,
          t_bseg_c TYPE TABLE OF ty_bseg.
    SELECT bukrs
           belnr
           gjahr
           bldat
           bstat
    FROM bkpf
    INTO TABLE t_bkpf_p
    WHERE bukrs IN sd_bukrs
    AND   bldat IN s_bldat
    AND   bstat EQ space .
    IF NOT t_bkpf_p[] IS INITIAL.
      SELECT bukrs
             belnr
             gjahr
             buzei
             shkzg
             dmbtr
             hkont
        FROM bseg
        INTO TABLE t_bseg_c
        FOR ALL ENTRIES IN t_bkpf_p
        WHERE bukrs EQ t_bkpf_p-bukrs
        AND   belnr EQ t_bkpf_p-belnr
        AND   gjahr EQ t_bkpf_p-gjahr
        AND   hkont EQ skb1-saknr.
    ENDIF.

  • Serious Performance issue in ADF?

    Hi Everyone,
    My Jdev version is 11.1.2.3.0.
    I have developed one ADF application and deployed into web logic server.
    I am accessing this page through url in one portal of client.
    After clicking on the page link in portal it opens the page and the page has search page(test field, submitbutton and result table).
    On clicking on submit button sometimes the result in the table comes in few seconds and sometimes it takes few minutes.
    its a very serious performance issue.
    What should i do to increase performance for my ADF page?
    why it takes much time sometimes?
    Please give suggestions.
    Thanks.

    Hi Kumar,
    Try to ensure proper indexes are placed based on search criteria in base table which will definitely increase the performance. Be sure to check the explain plan to see the performance of query instead of just running it in toad. If you feel everything is good from back end, you can tune your view object, go to view object editor->tuning and set the page range size=25 or some smaller value and see if that increases the performance.
    Refer below link for more guidelines:
    http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17904_01/core.1111/e10108/adf.htm
    Regards,
    Ravi Nuka

  • Serious locking issues with Main Stage 3

    Having serious locking issues with main stage 3.  I just did a music gig over the weekend with main stage 3, and the application locked up 8 times during my performance.  There were also several times where there was a delay between the time I struck a key on the midi controller and the time sound actually came out of the audio interface.  Has anyone else ran into this problem??
    10.
    I am running mountain lion 10.8.5, on a 2009 Macbook 2.53 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. w 8 GB Ram.
    Anyone know how to fix this, if even possible?  

    Just read some reviews. There seems to be a lot of problems with the latest main stage update.  I didn't notice these latency problems until did the latest update..
    Apple please fix this quickly!!!

  • Serious resolution issues with After Effects CC (2014) on Windows 8.1 Pro on Dell Precision M3800 laptop??

    My new company installed Adobe Creative Cloud (There was some annoying Proxy issues at first, because of the seriously tight I.T policies) but we are having some serious resolution issues with After Effects CC 2014 (also have this resolution problem with Adobe Premiere, Media Encoder, Muse) on Windows 8.1 Pro on a Dell Precision M3800 laptop with icons and interface looking too small and hard to see, is there a fix, an update or a work around, can anyone help?
    Any help will be appreciated!
    k.regards
    Ramon

    Hi Todd is there a time-frame for this fix, there is a lot of pressure on me, because I convinced my company to get the Creative Cloud and quite a lot of the CC software is not compatible with the latest Windows 8.1 OS.
    Is there at least a work around, until this big fix comes along?
    k.regards
    Ramon

Maybe you are looking for

  • Send Vendor Balance confirmations report output (F.18) to External email ID

    Dear Friends. I have following requirement Our Client requirement is to send Vendor Balance confirmations report output (Tcode F.18) to external email ID of vendor. So please guide accordingly. I have done BASIS Settings for SMTP (Tcode SCOT, RZ10) a

  • Issue Installing 64 bit Windows 8

    Lenovo X230 Type 2306 I cannot install a 64 bit operating system on my laptop. I am unsure if this is due to a bios setting or an operating system setting. I am trying to install Windows 8 Pro 64 bit from a usb flashdrive made using the Windows insta

  • No dialog box

    I currently have Adobe 8 with Windows XP.  I am trying to download Adobe REader 10.  When I try to do this in Internet Explorer I do not get a dialog box to appear and cannot complete download (also don't see it in download folder or on desktop).  Wh

  • Install error : Please make sure TEMP is set to a valid writable directory

    Hello all. When i run ./runInstaller on the command prompt.. i get the error below. # ./runInstaller Error in writing to directory /tmp. Oracle Universal Installer needs you to have permission in this area to install. Installation cannot continue. Pl

  • Procedure doesn't work in a DBMS_SCHEDULER job

    I have a problem with an dbms_scheduler job. We have a procedure with a select and the follwing where clause and tb.geaendert_am >= systimestamp - interval '5' minute; The column tb.geaendert_am is a timestamp column and means changed_on. That proced