SOAP performance issue

Hi,
My problem is that the NE I am connecting to was exposing its interfaces as LDAP and now they are changing those interfaces as SOAP. We are getting a very high load and I feel that since LDAP is optimized for fast read-speeds, replacing the LDAP interfaces with Web Services would have performance implications since SOAP performs poorly compared to the LDAP because of transport inefficiencies & marshalling/unmarshalling overhead.
Although the NE team says that they will be able to give response withing the defined SLA time (around 1 sec) but the what they are not understanding is that even if they given response withing 1 sec, Web services invocation operations would also be expensive. Also overhead on our end (client) would also include extracting the SOAP envelope and parsing the XML by engine. Further, XML data cannot be optimized much for all cases.
Pls guide me if I am correct or wrong in my opinion.
Thanks
AA

If I get it right, LDAP ist just a protocol for calling a directory service. The backend, is performing with the same throughput independent of the type of protocol.
Our performance tests on our soa-servers showed, the total overhead, including network, logging, Application server stuff, xml parsing, is about 10%. We got this value testing with JMeter and logging statements inside of the code.
CPU, Memory (incl garbage collecting) and networktraffic were very, very good, we didn't except some of these results (~40 samples / second -> 3% CPU on a Sun T5120 machine), most overhead was from the backends.
I guess you're correct if you say, SOAP needs more ressources than LDAP, but this is less than you think (in my opinion, of course).
You definetly should do some performance tests and compare the results with the ldap variant.
regards
slowfly

Similar Messages

XI soap performance issue

Hi guys,
I have a performance related question about soap sender:
I have 2 cases:
1. there are 500 requests for 1 oubound interface
2. there are 500 requests for 10 outbound interfaces, every interface has 50 requests
All of the sender adapters are soap sender adapter.
Are there any differences for the XI performance?
Any answers will be very appreciated.
Regards,
Bean

Hi
XI has some allocated threads and will assign to different threads by the requirements, for example, there are 10 threads, if I use only 1 interface, all of the 10 threads will used for the interface if required, if I use 10 interfaces, then the 10 threads will be assigned to the interfaces by the need.
Small correction Xi is not having some theads allocated. It is like one interface that is having mapping program, Design objects and configuration objects which will run when executing the interface. Now if you configure more channels.this will allow triggering of multiple threads of same programs and process parallely. Memory is divided between various threads so it performed better. If failure occur it effects only that thread and others are not effected. Now if you have single interface single thread running will be loaded.
Now come to some general example. Did you use Google Crome. It is faster than other equivalent tools the reason is its create individual process for executing for each window..............
Hope this helps
Thanks
Gaurav
Hi Gauray,
Thanks so much for your kind help, I can understand your points, could you please give me some document links for this?
Why I raise this question is that there are several applications in my system landscape, I can design a common interface in XI which may reduce our development effort, otherwise I need to design different interfaces and configuration objects for them, I need a balance between performance and development effort, what's your opinion? Does the common design influence the performance definitely?
Regards,
Bean

PLSRV_CALL_ADAPTER, HTTP_SEND Performance issue in PI 7.0 (SP16)

Dear friends,
I have a synchronous WebService -> XI -> Proxy scenario and tried to do a stress testing this morning, when we simulate 80 client users to send the soap request to XI server, I found a performance issue that some of the request messages spent too long time, after checking the details, it's found that the run time item 'HTTP_SEND' is the major reason:
<SAP:RunTimeItem>
<SAP:Name type="PLSRV">PLSRV_CALL_ADAPTER</SAP:Name>
<SAP:Timestamp type="begin" host="JT-PIDEV">20080919023723.87111</SAP:Timestamp>
</SAP:RunTimeItem>
- <SAP:RunTimeItem>
<SAP:Name type="PLSRV">HTTP_SEND</SAP:Name>
<SAP:Timestamp type="begin" host="JT-PIDEV">20080919023723.878215</SAP:Timestamp>
</SAP:RunTimeItem>
- <SAP:RunTimeItem>
<SAP:Name type="PLSRV">HTTP_SEND</SAP:Name>
<SAP:Timestamp type="end" host="JT-PIDEV">20080919023734.474367</SAP:Timestamp>
</SAP:RunTimeItem>
- <SAP:RunTimeItem>
<SAP:Name type="PLSRV">PLSRV_CALL_ADAPTER</SAP:Name>
<SAP:Timestamp type="end" host="JT-PIDEV">20080919023734.480719</SAP:Timestamp>
</SAP:RunTimeItem>
you can find that this step spent about 11 seconds which is not acceptable, as in the normal case, it takes not more than 1 second.
From my understanding, this step will send the message to the target SAP system via the plugin http, why these messages took such long time? How can I tuning this issue?
Regards,
Bean

Hi kk,
thanks a lot for your kind help .
Do you have a web dispatcher to balance the load for the HTTP calls to your ABAP proxy? Please note, in SMICM of your backend SAP system, you will see minimum number of threads that have been allotted. More threads get allotted till the maximum limit is reached. Looks like this could be the issue. Are you webservice calls to XI load balanced as well. Also, check if the ABAP server proxy program is not causing a delay. Looks like you need some fine tuning to be done.
as both of the inbound and outbound in integration server use the plugin http from/to ICM, and the business logic in backend SAP system so very simple (just some assignment statements), therefore I'm considering the following fine tuning options:
1. increase the max threads of integration server to make sure that the outbound messages don't need to wait for the free thread
2. increase the max threads of ICM in target SAP backend system to make sure that the inbound messages don't need to wait
3. i'm not clear whether we have web dispatcher in XI or SAP backend system, could you please guide me how I can tuning that?
Regards,
Bean

POA performance issues under windows 2008 R2

Hello - we are running GW 8.02 hp3 and recently moved our main post office (~600 users) from Netware to Windows 2008 R2 (running under Vsphere 4.1).
We have started seeing intermittent slow performance issues esp. when moving a message from one folder to another, or sending a broadcast email.
It doesn't appear to be a hardware resource issue: disk queues don't exceed 1, with low latency (7-15ms) and we're not cpu or memory bound (that I can see).
Here are our current config settings:
Message Worker Threads: 15
Maximum GWCheck Worker Threads: 8
C/S Handler Threads: 30
Max Physical: 2048
Max App Connections: 4084
Soap Threads: 20
We don't see any serious errors in the logs when performance becomes slow. Could this just be a tuning issue?

In article <[email protected]>, Javerkio wrote:
> we are running GW 8.02 hp3 and recently moved our main post
> office (~600 users) from Netware to Windows 2008 R2 (running under
> Vsphere 4.1).
>
Windows is the lowest performing host for GroupWise, so that is a part
of what you are hitting.
How are you monitoring memory usage? I've found that the vCenter tools
aren't a good indicator of that, where as the Windows tools are better
in that respect. The biggy is that you don't want much paging to disk.
How much do you have assigned to this VM?, how many cores? And are
these ESX box(es) over committed on those two?
Those settings on their own don't really mean a whole lot. What we need
to see is what is actually being used, and if you are running out of
them, then upping those specific numbers can help. The best way is to
watch the POA web interface for the relevant settings.
http://hostnameorIP:7181/
Andy Konecny
Knowledge Partner (voluntary SysOp)
KonecnyConsulting.ca in Toronto
Andy's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=75037

Report Performance Issue - Activity

Hi gurus,
I'm developing an Activity report using Transactional database (Online real time object).
the purpose of the report is to list down all contacts related activities and activities NOT related to Contact by activity owner (user id).
In order to fullfill that requirment I've created 2 report
1) All Activities related to Contact -- Report A
pull in Acitivity ID , Activity Type, Status, Contact ID
2) All Activities not related to Contact UNION All Activities related to Contact (Base report) -- Report B
to get the list of activities not related to contact i'm using Advanced filter based on result of another request which is I think is the part that slow down the query.
<Activity ID not equal to any Activity ID in Report B>
Anyone encountered performance issue due to the advanced filter in analytic before?
any input is really appriciated
Thanks in advanced,
Fina

Fina,
Union is always the last option. If you can get all record in one report, do not use union.
since all records, which you are targeting, are in the activity subject area, it is not nessecery to combine reports. add a column with the following logic
if contact id is null (or = 'Unspecified') then owner name else contact name
Hopefully, this is helping.

Report performance Issue in BI Answers

Hi All,
We have a performance issues with reports. Report is running more than 10 mins. we took query from the session log and ran it in database, at that time it took not more than 2 mins. We have verified proper indexes on the where clause columns.
Could any once suggest to improve the performance in BI answers?
Thanks in advance,

I hope you dont have many case statements and complex calculations that you do in the Answers.
Next thing you need to monitor is how many rows of data that you are trying to retrieve from the query. If the volume is huge then it takes time to do the formatting on the Answers as you are going to dump huge volumes of data. Database(like teradata) returns initially like 1-2000 records if you hit show all records then even db is gonna fair amount of time if you are dumping many records
hope it helps
thanks
Prash

BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

Hi Masters,
I am working out for a solution for BW report developed in 0bcs_vc10 virtual cube.
Some of the querys is taking more 15 to 20 minutes to execute the report.
This is huge performance issue. We are using BW 3.5, and report devloped in bex and published thru portal. Any one faced similar problem please advise how you tackle this issue. Please give the detail analysis approach how you resolved this issue.
Current service pack we are using is
SAP_BW 350 0016 SAPKW35016
FINBASIS 300 0012 SAPK-30012INFINBASIS
BI_CONT 353 0008 SAPKIBIFP8
SEM-BW 400 0012 SAPKGS4012
Best of Luck
Chris
BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

Ravi,
I already did that, it is not helping me much for the performance. Reports are taking 15 t0 20 minutes. I wanted any body in this forum have the same issue how
they resolved it.
Regards,
Chris

Interested by performance issue ? Read this ! If you can explain, you're a master Jedi !

This is the question we will try to answer...
What si the bottle neck (hardware) of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6
I used PPBM5 as a benchmark testing template.
All the data and log as been collected using performance counter
First of all, describe my computer...
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 8 Pro 64-bit
CPU
Intel Xeon E5 2687W @ 3.10GHz
Sandy Bridge-EP/EX 32nm Technology
RAM
Corsair Dominator Platinum 64.0 GB DDR3
Motherboard
EVGA Corporation Classified SR-X
Graphics
PNY Nvidia Quadro 6000
EVGA Nvidia GTX 680 // Yes, I created bench stats for both card
Hard Drives
16.0GB Romex RAMDISK (RAID)
556GB LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed (RAID 0)
I have other RAID installed, but not relevant for the present post...
PSU
Cosair 1000 Watts
After many days of tests, I wanna share my results with community and comment them.
CPU Introduction
I tested my cpu and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit, can I reach this limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 1).
Intro : I tested my E5-XEON 2687W (8 Cores Hyperthread - 16 threads) to know if programs can use the maximum of it. I used Prime 95 to get the result. // I know this seem to be ordinary, but you will understand soon...
The result : Yes, I can get 100% of my CPU with 1 program using 20 threads in parallel. The CPU gives everything it can !
Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test...
(picture 1)
Disk Introduction
I tested my disk and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 2).
Intro : I tested my RAID 0 556GB (LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed) to know if I can reach the maximum % disk usage (0% idle Time)
The result : As you can see in picture 2, yes, I can get the max of my drive at ~ 1.2 Gb/sec read/write steady !
Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test to see the impact of transfering many Go of data during ~10 sec...
(picture 2)
Now, I know my limits ! It's time to enter deeper in the subject !
PPBM5 (H.264) Result
I rendered the sequence (H.264) using Adobe Media Encoder.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%, the turn around 50%
My Disk is totally idle !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate seem to be a wave (up and down). Probably caused by (Encrypt time.... write.... Encrypt time.... write...) // It's ok, ~5Mb/sec during transfert rate !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 39 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~65 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
GPU Load on card seem to be a wave also ! (up and down) ~40% usage of GPU during the process of encoding.
GPU Ram get 1.2Go of RAM (But with GTX 680, no problem and Quadro 6000 with 6 GB RAM, no problem !)
Comment/Question : CPU is free (50%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (60%), RAM is free (62%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result !
(picture 3)
PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (RAID LSI)
I rendered the sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder on my RAID 0 LSI disk.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%
My Disk wave and wave again, but far far from the limit !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down). Probably caused by (Buffering time.... write.... Buffering time.... write...) // It's ok, ~375Mb/sec peak during transfert rate ! Easy !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 40.5 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~48 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
GPU Load on card = 0 (This kind of encoding is GPU irrelevant)
GPU Ram get 400Mb of RAM (No usage for encoding)
Comment/Question : CPU is free (65%), disks are free (60%), GPU is free (100%), RAM is free (63%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
(picture 4)
PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (Direct in RAMDrive)
I rendered the same sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder directly in my RamDrive
Comment/Question : Look at the transfert rate under (picture 5). It's exactly the same speed than with my RAID 0 LSI controller. Impossible ! Look in the same picture the transfert rate I can reach with the ramdrive (> 3.0 Gb/sec steady) and I don't go under 30% of disk usage. CPU is idle (70%), Disk is idle (100%), GPU is idle (100%) and RAM is free (63%). // This kind of results let me REALLY confused. It's smell bug and big problem with hardware and IO usage in CS6 !
(picture 5)
PPBM5 (MPEG-DVD) Result
I rendered the sequence (MPEG-DVD) using Adobe Media Encoder.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%
My Disk is totally idle !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down). Probably caused by (Encoding time.... write.... Encoding time.... write...) // It's ok, ~2Mb/sec during transfert rate ! Real Joke !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 40 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~80 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Lot of thread, but it's ok in multi-thread apps!)
GPU Load on card = 100 (This use the maximum of my GPU)
GPU Ram get 1Gb of RAM
Comment/Question : CPU is free (70%), disks are free (98%), GPU is loaded (MAX), RAM is free (63%), my computer is pushed at limit during the encoding process for GPU only. Now, for this kind of encoding, the speed limit is affected by the slower IO (Video Card GPU)
Other : Quadro 6000 is slower than GTX 680 for this kind of encoding (~20 s slower than GTX).
(picture 6)
Encoding single clip FULL HD AVCHD to H.264 Result (Premiere Pro CS6)
You can look the result in the picture.
Comment/Question : CPU is free (55%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (90%), RAM is free (65%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Adobe Premiere seem to have some bug with thread management. My hardware is idle ! I understand AVCHD can be very difficult to decode, but where is the waste ? My computer want, but the software not !
(picture 7)
Render composition using 3D Raytracer in After Effects CS6
You can look the result in the picture.
Comment : GPU seems to be the bottle neck when using After Effects. CPU is free (99%), Disks are free (98%), Memory is free (60%) and it depend of the setting and type of project.
Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result in time for rendering the composition.
(picture 8)
Conclusion
There is nothing you can do (I thing) with CS6 to get better performance actually. GTX 680 is the best (Consumer grade card) and the Quadro 6000 is the best (Profressional card). Both of card give really similar result (I will probably return my GTX 680 since I not really get any better performance). I not used Tesla card with my Quadro, but actually, both, Premiere Pro & After Effects doesn't use multi GPU. I tried to used both card together (GTX & Quadro), but After Effects gives priority to the slower card (In this case, the GTX 680)
Premiere Pro, I'm speechless ! Premiere Pro is not able to get max performance of my computer. Not just 10% or 20%, but average 60%. I'm a programmor, multi-threadling apps are difficult to manage and I can understand Adobe's programmor. But actually, if anybody have comment about this post, tricks or any kind of solution, you can comment this post. It's seem to be a bug...
Thank you.

Patrick,
I can't explain everything, but let me give you some background as I understand it.
The first issue is that CS6 has a far less efficient internal buffering or caching system than CS5/5.5. That is why the MPEG encoding in CS6 is roughly 2-3 times slower than the same test with CS5. There is some 'under-the-hood' processing going on that causes this significant performance loss.
The second issue is that AME does not handle regular memory and inter-process memory very well. I have described this here: Latest News
As to your test results, there are some other noteworthy things to mention. 3D Ray tracing in AE is not very good in using all CUDA cores. In fact it is lousy, it only uses very few cores and the threading is pretty bad and does not use the video card's capabilities effectively. Whether that is a driver issue with nVidia or an Adobe issue, I don't know, but whichever way you turn it, the end result is disappointing.
The overhead AME carries in our tests is something we are looking into and the next test will only use direct export and no longer the AME queue, to avoid some of the problems you saw. That entails other problems for us, since we lose the capability to check encoding logs, but a solution is in the works.
You see very low GPU usage during the H.264 test, since there are only very few accelerated parts in the timeline, in contrast to the MPEG2-DVD test, where there is rescaling going on and that is CUDA accelerated. The disk I/O test suffers from the problems mentioned above and is the reason that my own Disk I/O results are only 33 seconds with the current test, but when I extend the duration of that timeline to 3 hours, the direct export method gives me 22 seconds, although the amount of data to be written, 37,092 MB has increased threefold. An effective write speed of 1,686 MB/s.
There are a number of performance issues with CS6 that Adobe is aware of, but whether they can be solved and in what time, I haven't the faintest idea.
Just my $ 0.02

Performance Issue for BI system

Hello,
We are facing performance issues for BI System. Its a preproductive system and its performance is degrading badly everyday. I was checking system came to know program buffer hit ratio is increaasing everyday due to high Swaps. So asked to change the parameter abap/buffersize which was 300Mb to 500Mb. But still no major improvement is found in the system.
There is 16GB Ram available and Server is HP-UX and with Netweaver2004s with Oracle 10.2.0.4.0 installed in it.
The Main problem is while running a report or creating a query is taking way too long time.
Kindly help me.

Hello SIva,
Thanks for your reply but i have checked ST02 and ST03 and also SM50 and its normal
we are having 9 dialog processes, 3 Background , 2 Update and 1 spool.
No one is using the system currently but in ST02 i can see the swaps are in red.
Buffer                 HitRatio   % Alloc. KB Freesp. KB   % Free Sp.   Dir. Size FreeDirEnt   % Free Dir    Swaps    DB Accs
Nametab (NTAB)                                                                                0
   Table definition     99,60     6.798                                                   20.000                                            29.532    153.221
   Field definition     99,82      31.562        784                 2,61           20.000      6.222          31,11          17.246     41.248
   Short NTAB           99,94     3.625      2.446                81,53          5.000        2.801          56,02             0            2.254
   Initial records      73,95        6.625        998                 16,63          5.000        690             13,80             40.069     49.528
                                                                                0
boldprogram                97,66     300.000     1.074                 0,38           75.000     67.177        89,57           219.665    725.703bold
CUA                    99,75         3.000        875                   36,29          1.500      1.401          93,40            55.277      2.497
Screen                 99,80         4.297      1.365                 33,35          2.000      1.811          90,55              119         3.214
Calendar              100,00       488            361                  75,52            200         42              21,00               0            158
OTR                   100,00         4.096      3.313                  100,00        2.000      2.000          100,00              0
                                                                                0
Tables                                                                                0
   Generic Key          99,17    29.297      1.450                  5,23           5.000        350             7,00             2.219      3.085.633
   Single record        99,43    10.000      1.907                  19,41           500         344            68,80              39          467.978
                                                                                0
Export/import          82,75     4.096         43                      1,30            2.000        662          33,10            137.208
Exp./ Imp. SHM         89,83     4.096        438                    13,22         2.000      1.482          74,10               0
SAP Memory      Curr.Use %    CurUse[KB]    MaxUse[KB]    In Mem[KB]    OnDisk[KB]    SAPCurCach      HitRatio %
Roll area               2,22                5.832               22.856             131.072     131.072                   IDs           96,61
Page area              1,08              2.832                24.144               65.536    196.608              Statement     79,00
Extended memory     22,90       958.464           1.929.216          4.186.112          0                                         0,00
Heap memory                                    0                  0                    1.473.767          0                                         0,00
Call Stati             HitRatio %     ABAP/4 Req      ABAP Fails     DBTotCalls         AvTime[ms]      DBRowsAff.
Select single     88,59               63.073.369        5.817.659      4.322.263             0                         57.255.710
Select               72,68               284.080.387          0               13.718.442             0                        32.199.124
Insert                 0,00                  151.955             5.458             166.159               0                           323.725
Update               0,00                    378.161           97.884           395.814               0                            486.880
Delete                 0,00                    389.398          332.619          415.562              0                             244.495
Edited by: Srikanth Sunkara on May 12, 2011 11:50 AM

RE: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte3M

Hi James,
Could you give me a call, I am at my desk.
I had meetings all day and couldn't respond to your calls earlier.
-----Original Message-----
From: James Min [mailto:jminbrio.forte.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:50 PM
To: Sharma, Sandeep; Pyatetskiy, Alexander
Cc: sophiaforte.com; kenlforte.com; Tenerelli, Mike
Subject: Re: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte 3M
Hello,
I just want to reiterate that we are very committed to working on
this issue, and that our goal is to find out the root of the problem. But
first I'd like to narrow down the avenues by process of elimination.
Open Cursor is something that is commonly used in today's RDBMS. I
know that you must test your query in ISQL using some kind of execute
immediate, but Sybase should be able to handle an open cursor. I was
wondering if your Sybase expert commented on the fact that the server is
not responding to commonly used command like 'open cursor'. According to
our developer, we are merely following the API from Sybase, and open cursor
is not something that particularly slows down a query for several minutes
(except maybe the very first time). The logs show that Forte is waiting for
a status from the DB server. Actually, using prepared statements and open
cursor ends up being more efficient in the long run.
Some questions:
1) Have you tried to do a prepared statement with open cursor in your ISQL
session? If so, did it have the same slowness?
2) How big is the table you are querying? How many rows are there? How many
are returned?
3) When there is a hang in Forte, is there disk-spinning or CPU usage in
the database server side? On the Forte side? Absolutely no activity at all?
We actually have a Sybase set-up here, and if you wish, we could test out
your database and Forte PEX here. Since your queries seems to be running
off of only one table, this might be the best option, as we could look at
everything here, in house. To do this:
a) BCP out the data into a flat file. (character format to make it portable)
b) we need a script to create the table and indexes.
c) the Forte PEX file of the app to test this out.
d) the SQL staement that you issue in ISQL for comparison.
If the situation warrants, we can give a concrete example of
possible errors/bugs to a developer. Dial-in is still an option, but to be
able to look at the TOOL code, database setup, etc. without the limitations
of dial-up may be faster and more efficient. Please let me know if you can
provide this, as well as the answers to the above questions, or if you have
any questions.
Regards,
At 08:05 AM 3/30/00 -0500, Sharma, Sandeep wrote:
James, Ken:
FYI, see attached response from our Sybase expert, Dani Sasmita. She has
already tried what you suggested and results are enclosed.
++
Sandeep
-----Original Message-----
From: SASMITA, DANIAR
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 6:43 PM
To: Pyatetskiy, Alexander
Cc: Sharma, Sandeep; Tenerelli, Mike
Subject: Re: FW: Case 59063: Select using LIKE has performance
issues
w/ CTLIB and Forte 3M
We did that trick already.
When it is hanging, I can see what is doing.
It is doing OPEN CURSOR. But not clear the exact statement of the cursor
it is trying to open.
When we run the query directly to Sybase, not using Forte, it is clearly
not opening any cursor.
And running it directly to Sybase many times, the response is always
consistently fast.
It is just when the query runs from Forte to Sybase, it opens a cursor.
But again, in the Forte code, Alex is not using any cursor.
In trying to capture the query,we even tried to audit any statementcoming
to Sybase. Same thing, just open cursor. No cursor declaration anywhere.==============================================
James Min
Technical Support Engineer - Forte Tools
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
1800 Harrison St., 17th Fl.
Oakland, CA 94612
james.minsun.com
510.869.2056
==============================================
Support Hotline: 510-451-5400
CUSTOMERS open a NEW CASE with Technical Support:
http://www.forte.com/support/case_entry.html
CUSTOMERS view your cases and enter follow-up transactions:
http://www.forte.com/support/view_calls.html

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

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

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

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

IOS 8.1+ Performance Issue

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

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

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

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

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

Performance issues with class loader on Windows server

We are observing some performance issues in our application. We are Using weblogic 11g with Java6 on a windows 2003 server
The thread dumps indicate many threads are waiting in queue for the native file methods:
"[ACTIVE] ExecuteThread: '106' for queue: 'weblogic.kernel.Default (self-tuning)'" RUNNABLE
     java.io.WinNTFileSystem.getBooleanAttributes(Native Method)
     java.io.File.exists(Unknown Source)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.ClasspathClassFinder.getFileSource(ClasspathClassFinder.java:398)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.ClasspathClassFinder.getSourcesInternal(ClasspathClassFinder.java:347)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.ClasspathClassFinder.getSource(ClasspathClassFinder.java:316)
     weblogic.application.io.ManifestFinder.getSource(ManifestFinder.java:75)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.MultiClassFinder.getSource(MultiClassFinder.java:67)
     weblogic.application.utils.CompositeWebAppFinder.getSource(CompositeWebAppFinder.java:71)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.MultiClassFinder.getSource(MultiClassFinder.java:67)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.MultiClassFinder.getSource(MultiClassFinder.java:67)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.CodeGenClassFinder.getSource(CodeGenClassFinder.java:33)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.findResource(GenericClassLoader.java:210)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.getResourceInternal(GenericClassLoader.java:160)
     weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.getResource(GenericClassLoader.java:182)
     java.lang.ClassLoader.getResourceAsStream(Unknown Source)
     javax.xml.parsers.SecuritySupport$4.run(Unknown Source)
     java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
     javax.xml.parsers.SecuritySupport.getResourceAsStream(Unknown Source)
     javax.xml.parsers.FactoryFinder.findJarServiceProvider(Unknown Source)
     javax.xml.parsers.FactoryFinder.find(Unknown Source)
     javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance(Unknown Source)
     org.ajax4jsf.context.ResponseWriterContentHandler.<init>(ResponseWriterContentHandler.java:48)
     org.ajax4jsf.context.ViewResources$HeadResponseWriter.<init>(ViewResources.java:259)
     org.ajax4jsf.context.ViewResources.processHeadResources(ViewResources.java:445)
     org.ajax4jsf.application.AjaxViewHandler.renderView(AjaxViewHandler.java:193)
     org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.RenderResponseExecutor.execute(RenderResponseExecutor.java:41)
     org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.LifecycleImpl.render(LifecycleImpl.java:140)
On googling this seems to be an issue with java file handling on windows servers and I couldn't find a solution yet. Any recommendation or pointer is appreciated

Hi shubhu,
I just analyzed your partial Thread Dump data, the problem is that the ajax4jsf framework ResponseWriterContentHandler triggers internally a new instance of the DocumentBuilderFactory; every time; triggering heavy IO contention because of Class loader / JAR file search operations.
Too many of these IO operations under heavy load will create excessive contention and severe performance degradation; regardless of the OS you are running your JVM on.
Please review the link below and see if this is related to your problem.. This is a known issue in JBOSS JIRA when using RichFaces / ajaxJSF.
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBPAPP-6166
Regards,
P-H
http://javaeesupportpatterns.blogspot.com/

Performance issues with flashed 7800GT (G5)

Hey,
I recently flashed a PC 7800GT with the 128K OEM NVidia ROM. It's one of the cards with a physical 128K ROM chip, so no worries there. However, it doesn't deliver the performance I expected. I have a Late 2005 2.0 DC, 10GB DDR2 and use Leopard 10.5.8.
This is what OS X puts out (german):
NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT:
Chipsatz-Modell:    GeForce 7800GT
Typ:    Monitor
Bus:    PCIe
Steckplatz:    SLOT-1
PCIe-Lane-Breite:    x16
VRAM (gesamt):    256 MB
Hersteller:    NVIDIA (0x10de)
Geräte-ID:    0x0092
Versions-ID:    0x00a1
ROM-Version:    2152.2
Performance issues are: I can't seem to reach frame rates that are anywhere near the results provided by barefeats. Quake 3 runs with approx 200fps in 1600x1200x32 (I expected 300+ fps), Quake 4 and UT2004 run okay, but not on high settings with high resolutions. So, not equivalent to what you wouldd expect from the system's specs) Same goes for Colin McRae Rallye. Now, I remember reading about performance issues in 10.5.8 with the flashed ROM since it doesn't seem to be a 1:1 copy of the original one. I didn't try it in Tiger since I don't exactly want to go back from Leopard. Am I right that this is probably an issue of the "OEM ROM" (from the macelite)? Does anyone have the real deal in terms of 7800GT ROMs and could provide me with a link?
Br

Hi-
If you send me an email via my website, I can send you a couple of ROMs that might work better.
http://www.jcsenterprises.com/Japamacs_Page/All_Things_PPC.html
Problem with the flashed 256 MB GT, though, is that Leopard runs slow.
Bad driver interaction.....
The 512 MB GTX is the way to go........

SOAP performance issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for