Performance with 4.6C and ECC6

Sun Sep 14 15:21:07 EDT 2008

We just upgraded on Labor Day from 4.72 to ECC 6.  We did have an issue
with deadline monitoring jobs......the swwdhex job that previously ran
consistently in a minute or less started running anywhere from 6 - 10
hours after the upgrade.  Though it was scheduled every five minutes,
each subsequent job would complete due to an active job running.  OSS
note 1092157 which indicates a design flaw in ECC 6.0 that actually
processes the deadlines sequentially.  Caused performance issues and
something to keep in mind if you use a lot of wait steps and deadline
monitoring..........

Melissa Yates

Utility Shared Services IT

SAP Workflow

(585) 771-4750

(585) 315-2134 (cell)

USS SAP Workflow Support Team
<mailto:USSSAPWorkflowSupportTeam at corp.root> 

________________________________

From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Mike Gambier
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 5:23 PM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Performance with 4.6C and ECC6

Rick,

Similar picture here as it happens. No Java stack and no intention of
using ABAP Classes or XML containers yet. But obviously the Workflow
engine has been re-written with these things in mind so yes it's proving
hard to comapre in terms of runtime like-for-like.

One thing is absolutely clear though: ECC 6 is a total memory hog by
comparison. SAP have advised us to add on 50% more workspace needed to
keep the same traffic flowing just to be sure and they don't seem to be
far off the mark.

We're running full scale volume tests with a Pre-Production environment
starting this weekend (rehersal for the real upgrade) so I'll have more
data to hand next week. I'm keeping my eye on some of our heavy workflow
steps to see how long they take in the new environment. The only
drawback is that we won't have exactly the same hardware to play with (4
app servers instead of 16) but at least I should be able to compare the
same Workflow instances and spot any odd timing differences between 4.6c
and ECC 6.

I have taken the precaution to change all of our Workflow definitions to
continue to use the 'old' BOR Object-based container (Structure
Persistence) for now. You may want to do the same as the default setting
(Compatibility) will seek to switch to the new XML container when the
release version of the Workflow Header is later than 4.6c. But that's up
to you of course :)

I've not heard the '30% slower' figure by the way. My gut feel is that
things are slightly slower all round, particularly deadlines, but I've
not noticed that much of a delay, yet.

Mike GT

________________________________

Subject: RE: Performance with 4.6C and ECC6
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 08:54:47 -0500
From: Rick.Sample at graybar.com
To: sap-wug at mit.edu

Mike,

I am sure Management / BASIS will take the standard recommendations for
hardware. So, backend stuff is not concerned for this request. 

So, more on the App process. 

Wf starts. Takes X time to process task XYZ, ...

We won't have the Jave stack installed from my understanding, so that is
out of the picture. 

The only thing that comes to mind on performance is the new XML changes.
But all our apps will continue to use the tables vs. XML. 

I hear that ECC6 is aprox 30% slower that 4.6C. Don't know how that
number keeps coming up, but like comparing apples to oranges me thinks. 

Thanks,

Rick

________________________________

From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Mike Gambier
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 3:34 PM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Performance with 4.6C and ECC6

Rick,

We're doing the same at the moment.

Are you focusing on the Basis side of things (e.g. like 'buffer gets' on
the db, database locks) or the Application/Business Process area (e.g.
event delivery, deadlines etc) or both?

Mike GT

________________________________

Subject: Performance with 4.6C and ECC6
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:36:21 -0500
From: Rick.Sample at graybar.com
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
CC: rick.sample at graybar.com

We are preparing to upgrade 4.6c to ECC6. I have been tasked to do a
"performance compare" between the two systems for WF relegated items.

Anyone have any tools, methods, etc. to do this type of performance
checks? I am not sure as to what to compare or how.

Rick Sample | SAP Business Workflow Developer
Office (314) 573-5822 | Mobile (314) 952-2273 | rick.sample at graybar.com 
www.graybar.com <http://www.graybar.com/>  - Graybar Works to Your
Advantage 

________________________________

Get Hotmail on your mobile from Vodafone Try it Now!
<http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/111354028/direct/01/>  

________________________________

Try Facebook in Windows Live Messenger! Try it Now!
<http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/111354030/direct/01/> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20080914/a3396c38/attachment.htm