How do we caluclate amount of ram required to run a query in BOXIR2

[Former Member]

Caluclate amount of ram required to run a query in BOXIR2

kbase Article ID: 5998

Article refers to: Business Objects 5

Symptom

When it takes Business Objects a long time to display the results of a query, it can be useful to check if there is enough RAM installed to run the query smoothly. If the amount of memory needed to run most queries exceeds the installed amount, then it is advised that you upgrade your machine.

Resolution

****CONFIGURATION*****

Business Objects version 5.x

Windows operating systems

All databases

*********RESOLUTION*****

Here are the steps to follow:

1. Run the query.

2. Export the data cube and save it as a *.txt file.

3. Check the size of this file in KB.

4. Divide this result by 1024 to determine the amount of RAM used by the data cube.

5. Multiply the result from step four above by two ("2") to determine the amount of RAM required to display the report.

For example, follow these steps to estimate the amount of RAM required returning of a query of 5000000 rows:

1. Run the query, but limit the number of rows returned to 5000.

2. Export the data cube and save as a *.txt file.

3. Check the size of this file (80 KB).

4. Multiply this result by one thousand (80000 KB) to determine the size of the data cube for the full 5000000 rows and then divide this result by 1024 (78.1 MB) to determine the amount of RAM required by the data cube.

5. Multiply this result (78.1 MB) by two ("2") to determine the amount of RAM required by BusinessObjects to display this report. In this example, the amount of internal memory required to run and display this query of 5000000 rows is 156.2 MB.

Is this article applicable for BOXIR2 or is there any way to caluclate amount of ram required to run a query

Thanks in advance

[former_member183750]

Please post this query to the Business Objects Enterprise Administration forum:

That forum is monitored by qualified technicians and you will get a faster response there.

Thank you for your understanding,

Ludek