Very poor and inconsistent Inbox performance

[Rick Sample]

We are on 4.6c so I don't know all that was changed in 4.7.

In 4.6c, a lot of work happens under the covers at inbox load. 
Searching links for object attachments, personal note attachments,
resubmissions, deadlines, etc.
(Sorry, I am on vacation and no system in front of me so can give you 
a lot of details. And need to hurry so I don't get caught working while 
on vacation.)

It obviously appears you are on the right track with the 
decreased load time so continue to look at notes for inbox reorgs, 
cleanup, etc. 
 
We had this OSS note fix for us to correct an Expiry Date issue(s).  
When inbox starts up, it looks at this field (at load time) to determine
if 
Documents need to be sent to trash. Also, determines if the 
users document was read. Again, so it can determine if the 
document needs to be trashed, resubmitted, etc. at load time. 
If users have un-read docs in the inboxes it will not trash the doc if
"un-read". 
And, nothing will get sent to trash it user never opens the inbox. This
all 
happens when users actaully open the Inbox. Not just log into SAP.

When we got this fixed, load times dropped accros the board and 
life is good.

The new code (new program) with company policys deletes all users
Documents 
read or unread after x days. If user wants to save his docs, he MUST 
move it out the inbox, move to subfolder, or change the Expiry date
manually 
to some future date. Obviously, most companies have different opinions
on 
what get retained, where, how long, etc. But for us, SAP inbox is never
to be used 
as e-mail or storing of long term docs. 

Start looking at the programs / t-codes in dev class SO. Run some of the
stats 
programs. You may find some interesting results. Like users storing HUGE
documents 
in the Inbox. (No limit on size of Attachments)

After we addressed these issues, the only time we get slow load times is
when 
user really has a lot of Work Items and/or Documents. And they have to
have 1000+ 
to really bog them down.

I will send you my notes and our custom mods (and details) if you
request 
when I return from vaction. 

Worked for us...

Rick




>>> pchatterjee at gmail.com 08/10/06 17:58 PM >>>
Thanks for all your responses.

To answer some of the questions asked:

1) There no custom virtual attributes that I have coded.

2) There only 2 active dialog workflows (one AP imaging one that is a
one stepper and a forms workflow that has 3 steps).   The most
complicated thing any of these are doing is rule resolution and even
that is pretty straightforward z-table read).

3) SAP has recommended 6 different OSS Notes many of which dela with
table SWW_WI2OBJ.

4) We had our Basis guys do table re-orgs on several SAP table which
improved acces to SBWP from over 1/2 hour to 2 minutes.  However, 2
minutes is still on the high side in my estimation.

Obviously the table re-org helped by an order of magnitude but I don't
get why the table re-org had the effect it did since prior to the
re-org different users were getting performance between 2 minutes to
over a half hour on t-code SBWP.


We are implementing the following notes based on SAP's recommendations:

* 725721 - Incorrect index on the SWW_WI2OBJ table
* 857869 - SWW_WI2OBJ is not deleted
* 857122 - SWW_WI2OBJ in the RSWWWIDE_DEP report
* 835528 - Workitem-to-object relation missing for ABAP objects
* 861380 - SWW_CONTOB after SWW_WI2OBJ migration
* 905886 - Error updating the sww_wi2obj table

I will have to look into the user settings Jocelyn suggested and see
if that's part of it.

Will let you guys know -- thanks again for the input!

With regards,
Partha



On 8/9/06, Dart, Jocelyn <jocelyn.dart at sap.com> wrote:
> Watch out for two other things:
>
> 1. Some user settings have known performance costs such as the setting
> to show work items in user's own language - which means every work
item
> has to be translated as it is rendered in the inbox.
>
> 2. It could be caused by bad coding behind your object - e.g. if you
> have a virtual attribute used in your work item long text with
> performance-costly coding behind it then because the work item long
text
> is rendered in the inbox preview this in itself can cause the bad
> performance.  I had this once at a customer (attribute code = read
> entire year's data very badly to calculate single figure) - not fun to
> find!    Turning on runtime analysis and other trace tools may help to
> identify if there is an excessive amount of processing happening
against
> any one table or program which may help narrow it down.
>
>
> Regards,
> Jocelyn Dart
> Senior Consultant
> SAP Australia Pty Ltd.
> Level 1/168 Walker St.
> North Sydney
> NSW, 2060
> Australia
> T   +61 412 390 267
> M   + 61 412 390 267
> E   jocelyn.dart at sap.com
> http://www.sap.com
>
> The information contained in or attached to this electronic
transmission
> is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for
> the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any distribution,
> copying, review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this
> electronic transmission or the information contained in it is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in
error,
> please immediately contact the sender to arrange for the return of the
> original documents.
> Electronic transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure and
> accordingly, the sender does not accept liability for any such data
> corruption, interception, unauthorized amendment, viruses, delays or
the
> consequences thereof.
> Any views expressed in this electronic transmission are those of the
> individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the
> sender is authorized to state them to be the views of SAP AG or any of
> its subsidiaries. SAP AG, its subsidiaries, and their directors,
> officers and employees make no representation nor accept any liability
> for the accuracy or completeness of the views or information contained
> herein. Please be aware that the furnishing of any pricing
information/
> business proposal herein is indicative only, is subject to change and
> shall not be construed as an offer or as constituting a binding
> agreement on the part of SAP AG or any of its subsidiaries to enter
into
> any relationship, unless otherwise expressly stated.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of Rick Sample
> Sent: Wednesday, 09 August 2006 10:53 PM
> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
> Subject: Re: Very poor and inconsistent Inbox performance
>
> Partha,
> We are on 4..6c and when we get near 1000+ WIs (or Documents) things
> start slowing
> down when users spin up the inbox.
>
> 50 - 150 WIs is nothing! I would review what Mike stated. Anything
> dynamic when loading SWBP will slow it down.
>
> Also, how many Documents are in the inboxs? Of what type? How large?
> Large attachments?
> > I have cleaned the workflow environment of all extraneous and...
> Any inbox reorgs? SO30 / 31, etc. lately?
> A boat load of Documents in users inboxes have also caused us some
> delays.
>
> Rick
>
> >>> asap at workflowconnections.com 8/9/2006 1:47 >>>
> Hi Partha,
>
> Ramki's suggestion is a good one, if that is not the case it may also
> be
> the work items that are causeing it. Are the long and the short users
> looking at the same tasks?
>
> If not, try to isolate the task that's slowing things down. An overly
> complex virtual attribute used in the task description can cause
> chaos.
>
> In terms of table size, even 500,000 is tiny and completed work items
> shouldn't slow things down.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > Got a weird one that I have not run into before.  We are on 6.20
> Basis
> > with 4.7 Enterprise (patch level 55).
> >
> > Different users are getting wildly different performances in trying
> to
> > enter the t-code SBWP.  Some get in with 1 - 2 minutes and others it
> > takes over 30 minutes.
> >
> > Each user has between 50 and 150 workitems.
> >
> > We are using the the standard layouts and no one is using dynamic
> > columns (there are dynamic columns available but no one is using
> them
> > yet).
> >
> > I have cleaned the workflow environment of all extraneous and
> > completed workflows (only 9000 total remaining -- down from
> 500,000).
> >
> > Anyone else experience this type of poor and inconsistent
> performance?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Partha