Application Development Discussions
Join the discussions or start your own on all things application development, including tools and APIs, programming models, and keeping your skills sharp.
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Idoc processing best practices - use of RBDAPP01 and RBDMANI2

0 Kudos

We are having performance problems in the processing of inbound idocs.  The message type is SHPCON, and transaction volume is very high.  I am a functional consultant, not an ABAP developer, but will try my best to explain our current setup.

1)     We have a number of message variants for the inbound SHPCON message, almost all of which are set to trigger immediately upon receipt under the Processing by Function Module setting.

2)      For messages that fail to process on the first try, we have a batch job running frequently using RBDMANI2.

We are having some instances of the RBDMANI2 almost every day which get stuck running for a very long period of time.  We frequently have multiple SHPCON idocs coming in containing the same material number, and frequently have idocs fail because the material in the idoc has become locked.  Once the stuck batch job is cancelled and the job starts running again normally, the materials unlock and the failed idocs begin processing.  The variant for the RBDMANI2 batch job is currently set with a packet size of 1 and without parallel processing enabled.

I am trying to determine the best practice for processing inbound idocs such as this for maximum performance in a very high volume system.  I know that RBDAPP01 processes idocs in status 64 and 66, and RBDMANI2 is used to reprocess idocs in all statuses.  I have been told that setting the messages to trigger immediately in WE20 can result in poor performance.  So I am wondering if the best practice is to:

1)     Set messages in WE20 to Trigger by background program

2)     Have a batch job running RBDAPP01 to process inbound idocs waiting in status 64

3)     Have a periodic batch job running RBDMANI2 to try and clean up any failed messages that can be processed

I would be grateful if somebody more knowledgeable than myself on this can confirm the best practice for this process and comment on the correct packet size in the program variant and whether or not parallel processing is desirable.  Because of the material locking issue, I felt that parallel processing was not desirable and may actually increase the material locking problem.  I would welcome any comments.

This appeared to be the correct area for this discussion based upon other discussions.  If this is not the correct area for this discussion, then I would be grateful if the moderator could re-assign this discussion to the correct area (if possible) or let me know the best place to post it.  Thank you for your help.


Active Contributor

Hi Bob,

Not sure if there is an official best practice, but the note 1333417 - Performance problems when processing IDocs immediately does state that for the high volume the immediate processing is not a good option.

I'm hoping that for SHPCON there is no dependency in the IDoc processing (i.e. it's not important if they're processed in the same sequence or not), otherwise it'd add another complexity level.

In the past for the high volume IDoc processing we scheduled a background job with RBDAPP01 (with parallel processing) and RBDMANIN as a second step in the same job to re-process the IDocs with errors due to locking issues. RBDMANI2 has a parallel processing option, but it was not needed in our case (actually we specifically wouldn't want to parallel-process the errors to avoid running into a lock issue again). In short, your steps 1-3 are correct but 2 and 3 should rather be in the same job.

Also I believe we had a designated server for the background jobs, which helped with the resource availability.

As a side note, you might want to confirm that the performance issues are caused only by the high volume. An ABAPer or a Basis admin should be able to run a performance trace. There might be an inefficiency in the process that could be adding to the performance issue as well.

Hope this helps.

0 Kudos

Thank you Jelena.  Based on your reply and the OSS note that you have referenced, I think I'm on the right track.  I have a call tomorrow with one of our IBM consultants to try and agree on a course of action and implement it.  Your answer is definitely helpful.  I'll mark for sure whether it completely answers the question after I speak with our consultant tomorrow.