2008 Dec 11 12:09 PM
Hi all,
I would like to know if performing joins on more than 10 tables has some performance issues? If so, is there any limit on the joins that can be done?
Is there another way out for this problem?
2008 Dec 11 12:13 PM
Hi,
There is no limit as such to use number of joins but if you have 10 tables(with huge data) obviously you will run into performance issues.
Better use join on 2-3 tables and then do your operations on the internal tables.
Rgds,
Sandeep
Hi,
There is no limit as such to use number of joins but if you have 10 tables(with huge data) obviously you will run into performance issues.
Better use join on 2-3 tables and then do your operations on the internal tables.
Rgds,
Sandeep
2008 Dec 11 12:13 PM
Hi,
There is no limit as such to use number of joins but if you have 10 tables(with huge data) obviously you will run into performance issues.
Better use join on 2-3 tables and then do your operations on the internal tables.
Rgds,
Sandeep
2008 Dec 11 12:13 PM
2008 Dec 11 12:21 PM
There can be a maximum of 24 "JOIN" joining 25 Tables or views.
Performance issue will depend on the fields used for restricting data.
There is no problem in Joining 3 or more tables your where clause should be covering the important fields.
2008 Dec 11 3:14 PM
>
> There can be a maximum of 24 "JOIN" joining 25 Tables or views.
Can you show where this is documented?
Rob
2008 Dec 11 4:07 PM
F1-Help for JOIN (in Rel. 7.00). Coincidentally I just found that today and learned about that limit. It will be difficult to get close to this limit in a reasonable fashion though...
Thomas
2008 Dec 11 4:12 PM
I'm a bit embarassed - I looked at that as well and missed it.
I wonder if that limit would include the tables that are included in the views.
Rob
2008 Dec 11 4:21 PM
If I had to bet, I'd say no, not included...do you have time to try out with a little test program?
2008 Dec 11 4:36 PM
>
> If I had to bet, I'd say no, not included...do you have time to try out with a little test program?
Probably not so little, but maybe sometime. I know there are standard SAP views with upwards of 13 or 14 tables, but I doubt if they would be compatable for joining.
Rob
2008 Dec 15 2:44 PM
>
> >
> > If I had to bet, I'd say no, not included...do you have time to try out with a little test program?
> Probably not so little, but maybe sometime. I know there are standard SAP views with upwards of 13 or 14 tables, but I doubt if they would be compatable for joining.
>
> Rob
How about a self join?
2008 Dec 15 2:50 PM
>
> How about a self join?
Sounds OK - what are your results?
Rob
2008 Dec 11 2:59 PM
Hi,
If you are talking about performance then always use for all entries.
Thanks & Regards,
Krishna..
2008 Dec 11 4:22 PM
>
If you are talking about performance then always use for all entries.
I wonder, if we can have a thread once, without this statement...
2008 Dec 15 2:38 PM
Hi,
You can uase joins rather than nested loops....
Up to three joins are okey, more joins degrade performance....
Better practice is to use for all entries....
Thanks & Regards,
Krishna...
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 3 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 |