<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Performance issues with inner joins... in Application Development and Automation Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833226#M1130731</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;try to limit the data as Thomas implied&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;check that all the joined fields are supported by an index &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;make sure table statsitics are current to have a good execution plan (see in ST05)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bye&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;yk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:13:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2008-11-25T14:13:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833222#M1130727</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a query which needs to be performance tuned... Its taking long to execute in background. Please see if we can tune this query by any chance..&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;select vbak&lt;SUB&gt;kunnr  vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln  vbap&lt;SUB&gt;posnr  vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vdatu  vbak~bstnk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         vbak&lt;SUB&gt;netwr  kna1&lt;/SUB&gt;stras  kna1&lt;SUB&gt;ort01  kna1&lt;/SUB&gt;regio  kna1~pstlz&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         vbak&lt;SUB&gt;vkbur  vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;matnr  vbap&lt;SUB&gt;arktx  vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;kwmeng&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         vbap&lt;SUB&gt;netpr  vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;netwr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         into table i_order&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         from vbak&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         inner join vbpa on vbpa&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln eq vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         inner join kna1 on kna1&lt;SUB&gt;kunnr eq vbpa&lt;/SUB&gt;kunnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         inner join vbap on vbap&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln eq vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         inner join vbup on vbup&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln eq vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;                        and vbup&lt;SUB&gt;posnr eq vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;posnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         inner join vbep on vbep&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln eq vbup&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;                        and vbep&lt;SUB&gt;posnr eq vbup&lt;/SUB&gt;posnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;         where vbak~auart   in r_auart&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbak~kunnr   in r_kunnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbak~vkbur   in r_vkbur&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbpa~parvw   eq 'WE'&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbap~kwmeng  gt 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbap~abgru   eq space&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbep~bmeng   gt 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;           and vbup~lfsta   ne c_completely_processed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Vinod.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:01:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833222#M1130727</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-24T18:01:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833223#M1130728</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; and vbak~kunnr in r_kunnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I see a slight chance here. Should r_kunnr typically hold a very narrow range of ship-to's, then you could try adding table VAKPA to the join and hope that the optimizer does the right thing...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thomas&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:33:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833223#M1130728</guid>
      <dc:creator>ThomasZloch</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-24T21:33:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833224#M1130729</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi ,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;the select can be split into  4 or 5 different select statements:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;select distinct vbak&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;posnr  into table itab1 from vbak &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; inner join vbap on vbap&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln = vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; inner join vbup on vbup&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln = vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;   and vbup&lt;SUB&gt;posnr = vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;posnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;   where &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;	vbak~auart in r_auart&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    and vbak~kunnr in r_kunnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    and vbak~vkbur in r_vkbur&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    and vbap~kwmeng gt 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    and vbap~abgru eq space&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    and vbup~lfsta ne c_completely_processed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;if not itab1 is initial.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;select distinct vbak&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;posnr  into table itab2 from vbak &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; inner join vbap on vbap&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln = vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; inner join vbep on vbep&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln = vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;	and vbep&lt;SUB&gt;posnr = vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;posnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;	for all entries of tABLE itab1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;   where &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;	vbak~vbeln = itab1-vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;	and vbap~posnr = itab1-posnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;        and and vbep~bmeng gt 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;endif.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;if not itab2 is initial.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;select vbak&lt;SUB&gt;kunnr vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln vbap&lt;SUB&gt;posnr vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vdatu vbak~bstnk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vbak&lt;SUB&gt;netwr kna1&lt;/SUB&gt;stras kna1&lt;SUB&gt;ort01 kna1&lt;/SUB&gt;regio kna1~pstlz&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vbak&lt;SUB&gt;vkbur vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;matnr vbap&lt;SUB&gt;arktx vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;kwmeng&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vbap&lt;SUB&gt;netpr vbap&lt;/SUB&gt;netwr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;into table i_order&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;from vbak&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;inner join vbpa on vbpa&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln eq vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;inner join kna1 on kna1&lt;SUB&gt;kunnr eq vbpa&lt;/SUB&gt;kunnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;inner join vbap on vbap&lt;SUB&gt;vbeln eq vbak&lt;/SUB&gt;vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;for all entries of table itab2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; where&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vbak~vbeln = itab2-vbeln&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;and vbap~posnr = itab2-posnr&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;and  and vbpa~parvw eq 'WE'.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;endif.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 06:00:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833224#M1130729</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-25T06:00:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833225#M1130730</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Srinivas,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;what you say is: &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3 SQL statements are faster than 1.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sounds a bit strange , because &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;IF the joined tables contain data you have to go through all your statements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;If the driving tables contain a lot of rows the database has to do redundant work&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;and the FAE table becomes quite large and problematic&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;IF the joined tables contain no data you skip your SQL while the database also&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;don't read data that not exists&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;bye&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;yk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:12:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833225#M1130730</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-25T14:12:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833226#M1130731</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;try to limit the data as Thomas implied&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;check that all the joined fields are supported by an index &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;make sure table statsitics are current to have a good execution plan (see in ST05)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bye&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;yk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:13:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833226#M1130731</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-25T14:13:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833227#M1130732</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi YukonKid  ,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I think  joining 6 tables in one select statement is not advisible. so you can split that join  into 3  where the records fetched get restricted with each select statement. out of a set you would be picking up the desired ones. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would say the code I provided might not give you the correct result at first. but playing around with the statements will defnitely fetch you good results.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 04:46:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833227#M1130732</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-26T04:46:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833228#M1130733</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Use for all entries than joins. you will see better performance&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Rasheed&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 07:29:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833228#M1130733</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-26T07:29:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833229#M1130734</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Use for all entries than joins. you will see better performance&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Rasheed&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;this was discussed at least a thousand times, there are many sides of the problem, however not your statement was the outcome...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 07:37:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833229#M1130734</guid>
      <dc:creator>JozsefSzikszai</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-26T07:37:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833230#M1130735</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;My Dear,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;   Break your joins &amp;amp; use for all entries by selecting two tables one by one.  &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;   &lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;
   for eg: if you got t1,t2,t3, t4.
    select from t1 into it_t1.
    select from t2 into it_t2 for all entries in it_t1.
   select from t3 into it_t3 for all entries in it_t2.
   select from t4 into it_t4 for all entries in it_t3
 
now it_t4 contains your final req data.
   &lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;  &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks &amp;amp; Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Krishna....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 06:11:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833230#M1130735</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-27T06:11:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833231#M1130736</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Break your joins &amp;amp; use for all entries by selecting two tables one by one.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This level of ignorance is certainly stunning.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:35:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833231#M1130736</guid>
      <dc:creator>ThomasZloch</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-27T08:35:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833232#M1130737</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; This level of ignorance is certainly stunning.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On the other hand, this is the internet - you get what you pay for.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Rob&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:53:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833232#M1130737</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-27T14:53:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833233#M1130738</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Rob,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;exactly -  I will get payed when I tune up those source lines left by an FAE "expert" &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="wink"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;bye&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;yk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:01:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833233#M1130738</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-27T16:01:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833234#M1130739</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I saw statements with many more joined tables.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You know, some data models can be very complex (i.e OLTP systems try to reduce redundancy by pushing Normalization to the extreme).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It can be discussed if this kind of  avoiding redundancy will cost performance at the end.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But, normallly in OLTP you have indexed lookups of small sets of data, so complexity (should) not be an issue. Redundancy is, because you have to mess around with unsynchronized master data sources.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In data warehouse environments this kind of modelling will kill you. You would build your tables USING a kind of redundancy to keep the complexity small.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;At the end it's the question if you abuse a OLTP data model on data warehouse volumes.  &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It's not the number of joins but the data model you throw it on.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;bye&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;yk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:10:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833234#M1130739</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-11-27T16:10:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833235#M1130740</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;   If you want to see the performance issue in your prog, better to use for all entries.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;

   select x y z 
      from mara
      into it_mara
      for all entries in it_table
      where x = it_table-x.

&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks &amp;amp; Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Krishna..&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 07:10:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833235#M1130740</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-12-03T07:10:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833236#M1130741</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't know what bugs me more:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- OP never comes back to comment on the replies to his question&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- repetitive "use FAE" answers by people who obviously don't spend a minute to read and understand the discussion so far&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;any votes?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 08:52:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833236#M1130741</guid>
      <dc:creator>ThomasZloch</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-12-03T08:52:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833237#M1130742</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; I don't know what bugs me more:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; - OP never comes back to comment on the replies to his question&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; - repetitive "use FAE" answers by people who obviously don't spend a minute to read and understand the discussion so far&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; any votes?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How about both? Do we have a majority on that one?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;pk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 13:15:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833237#M1130742</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-12-03T13:15:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issues with inner joins...</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833238#M1130743</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; I don't know what bugs me more:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; - OP never comes back to comment on the replies to his question&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; - repetitive "use FAE" answers by people who obviously don't spend a minute to read and understand the discussion so far&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; any votes?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;FAE is well understood, so OP not getting back gets my vote (along with duplicate/cross posts).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Rob&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 13:55:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/performance-issues-with-inner-joins/m-p/4833238#M1130743</guid>
      <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-12-03T13:55:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

