How to solve this performance issue in receiver side RFC channel

[monikandan_p]

Hi Experts

I have done this requirement successfully (File->PI->RFC) for this below sender structure by applying udf functions and two messaging mappings, For sender side file picking correctly and quick but while reaching the RFC receiver structure its take nearly 15mins to get success, how to solve this performance issue. Please guide.

INPUT FILE STRUCTURE

"VarName;""TimeString"";""VarValue"";""Validity"";""Time_ms""",,

"Total_act_Butter;""31-10-2013 21:47:20"";98;1;41578907870",2431,

"Total_act_Liquor;""31-10-2013 21:47:20"";200;1;41578907870",2431,

"Actual_date_time;""31-10-2013 21:47:20"";""1-1-1990 21:47:18"";1;41578907870",2431,

"Cycle_time;""31-10-2013 21:47:20"";8",857966;1;41578907870,2431

"Cycle_number;""31-10-2013 21:47:20"";8;1;41578907870",2431,

"Total_act_Butter;""31-10-2013 21:55:19"";294;1;41578913416",7361,

"Total_act_Liquor;""31-10-2013 21:55:19"";600;1;41578913416",7361,

"Actual_date_time;""31-10-2013 21:55:19"";""1-1-1990 21:55:18"";1;41578913416",7361,

"Cycle_time;""31-10-2013 21:55:19"";14",16882;1;41578913416,7361

"Cycle_number;""31-10-2013 21:55:19"";10;1;41578913416",7361,

OUTPUT Structure Need

<Record>

<Total_act_Butter>98</Total_act_Butter

<Total_act_Liquor>200</"Total_act_Liquor>

<Actual_date_time>1-1-1990 21:47:18</Actual_date_time>

<Cycle_time>8</Cycle_time>

<Cycle_number>8</Cycle_number

<Key>41578907870</Key>

</Record>

<Record>

<Total_act_Butter>294</Total_act_Butter

<Total_act_Liquor>600</"Total_act_Liquor>

<Actual_date_time>1-1-1990 21:55:18</Actual_date_time>

<Cycle_time>16882</Cycle_time>

<Cycle_number>10</Cycle_number

<Key>41578913416</Key>

</Record>

Best Regards,

Monikandan.

[iaki_vila]

Hi Monikandan,

You have to keep in mind this tips:

1. If you are in PI 7.1 and above, in this scenario use the Integrated configuration object in the configuration, avoid the classical configuration.

2. If you have a large messages try to keep the PI memory with the minimum data, try to use UDF execution type "single values" or context, the queue could affect the perfomance.

3. If the messge mapping are to complicated, try to do the java mapping, but this option is only reommendable if you are a experienced java developer.

4. Avoid RFC or JDBC lookup.

5. For large text files with multiple records, you could split them into multiple messages in the file/ftp adapter. Of course, It's possible whit File Content Conversion.

Regards.

[monikandan_p]

Hi Experts,

Kindly provide some documents or sdn links if any one face this same problem to solve this issue.

Best Regards,

Monikandan

[iaki_vila]

Hi Monikandan,

These best practices documents  are very useful:

http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/f0b96675-87cf-2c10-b489-dee0ac03f...

http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/2016a0b1-1780-2b10-97bd-be3ac6221...

http://scn.sap.com/docs/DOC-44603

Regards.

[former_member192343]

I think the problem is at RFC side.

How long test mapping in ES builder takes?

Can you show some audit logs from rfc adapter?

[Former Member]

Hi Moni

How many records you are passing as input to the RFC??

Also check the code of the function module.

Check the processing time in PI , both integration and adapter engine.If you see the delay is in PI, then u might have to re-design your interface.

The structure you have mentioned, can be easily converted to the output struture using one java mapping itself, you don't have to create two mappings and two udfs.

[monikandan_p]

Hi Mikhail,           Kindly through the attached audit log.   Best Regards, Monikandan

[former_member192343]

21.11.2013 14:11:31.562    File "Data_His01.csv" has ben successfully archived on ftp server
21.11.2013 14:30:38.759    The message was successfully received by the messaging system.

What happened between these two steps? Mapping or sending from ftp to PI? Is it audit from message monitoring, not from channel monitoring?

Did you test mapping in editor (in ES Builder)?