<html dir="ltr"><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma
}
</style>
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.3790.2920" name="GENERATOR">
</head>
<body class="hmmessage" ocsi="x">
<div dir="ltr"><font face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2">Thanks Mikey. I am surprised about the XI stuff. While most sites wont worry about this I would guess that a lot of the high volume WF sites (like yours) would.</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma">Can you share some of the main reasons why you guys plan to not use the OO container stuff? On my current project, I am contracting to SAP US so I may be able to get access to some of the internal SAP resources. I could possible
raise this with them and see what they say.</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma">What do you mean by <em>tweak the WF persistence</em>? Do you mean changing from XML to the old approach in the WF Header?</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma">Alon</font></font></div>
<div>
<div><font face="Tahoma" size="2">
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><b><font face="Calibri" color="navy" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Calibri"></span></font></b></strong> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font face="Times New Roman" color="navy" size="3"><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: navy"></span></font></b></p>
</font>
<hr tabindex="-1">
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b>From:</b> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu [sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Gambier [madgambler@hotmail.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:59 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: Performance of OO vs BOR as used in WF<br>
</font><br>
<p></p>
Alon,<br>
<br>
We have no metrics yet but my gut feel overall is that the 'new' Workflow engine itself, which as you know is all based on ABAP Class objects, is likely to be slower and more memory-hungry then the 'old' 4.6c version, not faster.<br>
<br>
The number of instances involved to invoke a simple RFC FM call (which is what <u>
still</u> happens when executing a Task in the end) is staggering when you debug through it all.<br>
<br>
Also, eventhough we do not use XI, the new Workflow code invariably tries to invoke BPE stuff (the Workflow part of XI) pretty much everywhere. Pity we can't set a flag somewhere in a config table and avoid this :(<br>
<br>
We don't plan to use the OO container to start with (for lots of reasons) but I do intend to tweak the WF Persistence profiles of a few of our definitions to see whether there's any improvement or impact. So, if I find anything out I'll be sure and post it
here.<br>
<br>
By the way, I still have an OSS note outstanding about the Logical System name (SWW_CONTOB-LOGSYS) not being updated in the 'old' BOR Container table. We're pretty concerned about that as some of our instances are client-sensistive and complain if this field
is blank.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Mike GT<br>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote>
<hr>
From: araskin@3i-consulting.com<br>
To: sap-wug@mit.edu<br>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:08:30 -0400<br>
Subject: Performance of OO vs BOR as used in WF<br>
<br>
<style title="owaParaStyle">.ExternalClass P {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
</style>
<div dir="ltr">I am curious if anyone has run any tests to see whether performance is different when using OO container elements (class instances) as opposed to BOR (object type instances). My gut feel is that OO would be faster due to the reduced overhead
of not using those BOR macros but I am curious if anyone has actually done the comparison.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman">
<div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman">
<div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman"><font face="times new roman">Alon</font></font></div>
</font></div>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<hr>
Everything in one place. <a href="http://www.windowslive.co.uk/get-live" target="_blank">
All new Windows Live!</a> </div>
</body>
</html>