Full table scan for CRMD_ORDER_INDEX when calling CRM_ORDER_SAVE

[Former Member]

Hi All,

we are doing some performance testing for CRM order creation, during the performance tunning we found there is a full table scan for CRMD_ORDER_INDEX when the FM CRM_ORDER_SAVE is called. And checked the Indexes delivered by SAP, haven't seen any index can be used to improve the performance - as the selection statement is

Seems this is an issue SAP should consider, is there any standard note can be applied or shall we create an index to CRMD_ORDER_INDEX for field "HEADER" ?

Regards,

Samuel

[former_member205280]

Hi Samuel,

I'm not sure if this's the solution, but to get a better understand of the background work, you could enable SQL trace in ST05, normally we can check the execution plan to get a better idea what the program were doing, explicitly what table and fields were used in that SQL statement, and whether it was using full table scan or index scan, then you can decide whether you should create new index or not in SE11, remember not all full table scan are bad.

Regards,

Michael

[Former Member]

Thank you for your reply, Michael, actually the result of - Full table scan is coming from analysis from ST05, and also from the trace on the database ( Oracle for us ) level, we can see the database had a huge pressure when we creating CRM orders in a bulk ( cause the FM CMR_ORDER_SAVE is called ) - and the table CRMD_ORDER_INDEX for us have more 111 Million.

definitely we need to create an Index, but still don't understand why there is no other customer raised the same issue to SAP.. this should happen to all the sap crm customer...?

Anyway, thanks a lot

[RaymondGiuseppi]

Did you already read 1527039 - Enhancements in CRM Reporting Framework on 'Major performance problems'.

[Former Member]

Thank you Raymond, yes, I did check the note - to create an index on a header guid should helpful... however, I am still have the question, why SAP doing select * from CRMD_ORDER_INDEX where HEADER = IT_TABLE-HEARDERS, but no standard index against HEADER created....

possibly need to raise a ticket for this. thanks..