topic Re: Code Inspector Checks in Application Development and Automation Discussions

Code Inspector Checks

Former Member — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:59:09 GMT

Hi All,

I am doing Code Inspector Check for my Program.

Doing this, I am getting an Error Message Indicating to use TYPE TABLE OF instead of OCCURS 0 statement while declaring Internal Tables.

Question is, Is there any difference between TYPE TABLE OF and OCCURS 0 (Performance wise) ?

Helpful answers will be rewarder by points.

Thanks & Regards

Swatantra Pathak

Re: Code Inspector Checks

Former Member — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:03:46 GMT

When we define an internal table like

DATA itab TYPE STANDARD TABLE OF T001.

we create an internal table without a heading record, with the same exact structure of T001.

If you define an internal table using OCCURS, which seems to be outdated, you explicitly define the table's size.

So TYPE TABLE OF is better..

Reward points if useful

thanks and regards,

Nishant

Re: Code Inspector Checks

Former Member — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:05:23 GMT

hi check this...

occurs 0 will allocate a memory of 8kb statically....but

type standard table is a dynamic one it will allocate memory dynamically for the internal table...

Re: Code Inspector Checks

vinod_vemuru2 — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:11:40 GMT

HI,

Yes.

OCCURS 0 is obsolete now.

When we define internal table with OCCURS 0 it will allocate a default memory of 8KB. In TYPE TABLE/STANDARD TABLE OF it is dynamic i.e as and when we get a record memory will be allocated.

eg: If ur itab is with OCCURS 0 and u have data of size 2kb then 6KB memory is wasted i.e allocated and not used.

eg2: If ur itab is with OCCURS 0 , Each record accupies 1 KB. Then after filling 8 records and at the time of getting 9 th records another 8KB is allocated. If u have 9 records in ur table then 7KB is wasted.

If u r getting allocated with some memory(Resource) and not using means performancewise it is bad.

Hope above examples are clear.

Thanks,

Vinod.

Re: Code Inspector Checks

Former Member — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:20:40 GMT

Thanks Vinod...

doubt is clear now...