topic Re: performance issue in Application Development and Automation Discussions

performance issue

Former Member — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:52:03 GMT

Hi,

Pls check this piece of code .

My focus is on performance.

Pls help me to improve effeciency of this code.

Moving all the respective internal tables to i_customermaster.

LOOP AT I_KNA1 .

READ TABLE I_ADRC WITH KEY ADDRNUMBER = I_KNA1-ADRNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_KNA1 TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_ADRC TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_ADR2 WITH KEY ADDRNUMBER = I_KNA1-ADRNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_ADR2 TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_ADR6 WITH KEY ADDRNUMBER = I_KNA1-ADRNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_ADR6 TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_KNVV WITH KEY KUNNR = I_KNA1-KUNNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_KNVV TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_J1IMOCUST WITH KEY KUNNR = I_KNA1-KUNNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_J1IMOCUST TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_KNBK WITH KEY KUNNR = I_KNA1-KUNNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_KNBK TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_KNB1 WITH KEY KUNNR = I_KNA1-KUNNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_KNB1 TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_KNVK WITH KEY KUNNR = I_KNA1-KUNNR.

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_KNVK TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_BNKA WITH KEY BANKS = I_KNBK-BANKS .

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_BNKA TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE I_TSAD3T WITH KEY TITLE = I_ADRC-TITLE .

IF SY-SUBRC = 0.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING I_TSAD3T TO I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDIF.

APPEND I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDLOOP.

LOOP AT I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

WRITE : / I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

I_CUSTOMERMASTER-ZDATE = SY-DATUM.

I_CUSTOMERMASTER-ZTIME = SY-UZEIT.

I_CUSTOMERMASTER-FLAG = 'X'.

"To indicate the records to be transferred.

ZCUSTOMER_MASTER = I_CUSTOMERMASTER. "To update the Z-Table.

MODIFY ZCUSTOMER_MASTER.

MODIFY I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDLOOP.

Re: performance issue

Former Member — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:57:29 GMT

In palce of Move corresponding just transfer the data in the corresponding fields filed by field .

When records a and b have the exact same structure, it is more efficient to MOVE a TO b than to

MOVE-CORRESPONDING a TO b.

MOVE BSEG TO *BSEG.

Is better than

MOVE-CORRESPONDING BSEG TO *BSEG.

<REMOVED BY MODERATOR>

Edited by: Ashish Paliwal on Apr 16, 2008 8:31 PM

Edited by: Alvaro Tejada Galindo on Apr 16, 2008 1:36 PM

Re: performance issue

Former Member — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:09:31 GMT

When ever u use READ TABLE add BINARY SEARCH clause at the end.Prior to read statement sort itab.

Re: performance issue

Former Member — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:09:47 GMT

Jaya,

It looks to me like all these internal tables are hashed tables. WIth a quick look, I don't see anything blatantly wrong with the code you have posted with the exception of the below.


LOOP AT I_CUSTOMERMASTER.
  WRITE : / I_CUSTOMERMASTER.
  I_CUSTOMERMASTER-ZDATE = SY-DATUM.
  I_CUSTOMERMASTER-ZTIME = SY-UZEIT.
  I_CUSTOMERMASTER-FLAG = 'X'.
  "To indicate the records to be transferred.
  ZCUSTOMER_MASTER = I_CUSTOMERMASTER. "To update the Z-Table.
  MODIFY ZCUSTOMER_MASTER.
  MODIFY I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

ENDLOOP.

In the above code, Z table is being updated one record at a time. Firstly, MODIFY is an expensive statement. Secondly, updating one at a time, is inefficient.

Look for help on MODIFY statement. Do something like below:


LOOP AT I_CUSTOMERMASTER.
  WRITE : / I_CUSTOMERMASTER.
  I_CUSTOMERMASTER-ZDATE = SY-DATUM.
  I_CUSTOMERMASTER-ZTIME = SY-UZEIT.
  I_CUSTOMERMASTER-FLAG = 'X'.
  "To indicate the records to be transferred.
  ZCUSTOMER_MASTER = I_CUSTOMERMASTER. "To update the Z-Table.
  MODIFY I_CUSTOMERMASTER.
ENDLOOP.

MODIFY ZCUSTOMER_MASTER FROM TABLE I_CUSTOMERMASTER.

If there are a lot of records in I_CUSTOMERMASTER table, you may see significant improvement. Otherwise, you have to look elsewhere. Run time analysis (SE30) will help you in that task.

Edited by: Sudhi Karkada on Apr 16, 2008 5:12 PM

Re: performance issue

Former Member — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 04:59:43 GMT

Hi sudi...

Thanks a lot.

But When I checked after making changes to my code it didnt make any diffrence...Dnt know why.

response time was agin talmost same..