Honestly, I agree with Thad. 400k should not cause a significant
performance hit. Depending on how many records you create in a day, it
might not be a bad idea to set up a scheduled task to reindex the database.
Your DBA's should be able to help you decide when and how to do that.
I agree that table refreshes and work flow are usually the issue with
performance. Always always always run an activelink/filter/sql log for
every major operation independently. One for opening a record. One for
just opening a form. One for saving a record. One for modifying a record.
And it never hurts to run them for individual actions that are done
regularly. I know it sounds like a pain, but you can really tune the heck
out of your system if you do this. It will allow you to see what is running
and doesn't need to. And it will also give you a really good understanding
of your system.
Archiving is great, but with a properly tuned and sized system, it probably
isn't needed as much as people think.
Another thing to consider which might or might not be in your control, is
the distance (number of hops) between client and server as well as server
and database. I have seen some really ugly server - database connections.
As bad as the two not being in the same town much less datacenter.
All these are things that can negatively impact your performance.
HTH,
Brian Goralczyk
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Thad K Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> **
> Joe,
>
> Properly indexed and tuned 400,000 tickets on a form shouldn't be a
> problem. To expand on what Susan indicated, nine times out of ten, the
> biggest cause of slowness when opening forms is table fields that are
> needlessly being refreshed. Watch out for tables being refreshed on hidden
> tabs. Have an active link that fires on Gain Focus (of that tab) AND also
> on Display, with a run if of ('Page Holder' = "Tab Name'). The one action
> would be the table refresh.
>
> Of course there are other causes for slowness on opening of forms, but
> I've found this is the most common, and typically the easiest to fix. (oh,
> and be suspect of any active link that fires on all three of Window Open,
> Window Loaded, and Display - its probably running three times when you
> display a ticket).
>
> *Thad Esser*
> Remedy Developer
> "*Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours."*-- Richard
> Bach
>
>
> *"Susan Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
> Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)" <
> [email protected]>
>
> 03/26/2008 08:27 AM Please respond to
> [email protected]
>
> To
> [email protected] cc
> Subject
> Re: BMC Remedy - Copy to Archive and Delete from Source
>
>
>
>
> **
> Mel,
>
> I have found that for 'us' keeping less than 100k Help Tickets or Tasks in
> those forms keeps performance at an acceptable level. You have to remember
> that all workflow is affected by the number of records in the form and keep
> in mind any table fields that are refreshed.
>
> We generally keep 13 months of or closed records.
>
> Since we upgraded to v7.0.1P3 last year I was excited about the 'archive'
> option. In the last month I've used it on HTs, Tasks and email messages.
> For us it appears to require a huge amount of disk space for the
> copy/delete option. That needs to be planned for and it was greater than 1
> for 1 which is logical since another table is now holding the same record.
> For us it was quite a bit more than that infact we nearly brought the
> server down.
>
> I only archive in the lowest of production hours (night) when minimal
> users are on the system.
>
> I was also notified yesterday that it is not recommended to archive system
> email messages, there is some unusal result related to it. Sorry did not
> get more info.
>
> I found the actual archiving to go fairly quick, was doing about 70k
> records both times. I liked the fact I didn't have to manually delete the
> records afterwards.
>
> hth,
> Susan
>
> ShopperTrak
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Melanie Snayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> **
> Hi Joe
>
> Thanks so much for this information. Would you perhaps be able to tell me
> whether there was a delay on saving Help Desk tickets before you archived?
>
> Regards
> Mel
>
>
> On 3/26/08, *Joseph Kasell* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> wrote:
> Mel,
>
> We're running 7.0.1 with ITSM 6. We instituted archiving a little over a
> month ago, it was sorely needed, and it certainly has made a difference.
> Since Remedy was put into production back in the summer of 2004, approx
> 390,000 tickets had been submitted. The amount of tickets had not been a
> problem until recently when we began to see performance lags performing
> various actions in Remedy. Opening an existing Help Desk ticket from the
> Remedy Support console alone was taking anywhere from 1 to 5 seconds
> depending on the ticket (API and SQL logs were very helpful here).
>
> We decided to archive all Help Desk tickets with a status of Closed that
> were older than 13 months. We considered using Remedy's archiving
> feature,
> but eventually went with Misi Mladoniczky's rrrchive utility. Since our
> lab testing indicated that the archiving of an estimated 250,000 tickets
> would take about 6 to 7 hours (and slow the system down tremendously), we
> decided to archive in chunks of 40,000 which limited the performance pain
> to about an hour. We did this for 7 nights in a row. I can tell you that
> since, performance has improved tremendously (max time to open an existing
> ticket is about a second). Archiving is done nightly now. It takes a
> minute to archive the 400 to 500 tickets that meet the archive criteria.
> I
> know that my users are happy.
>
> Joe
>
> Joseph Kasell
> Navy Federal Credit Union
>
>
>
>
> Melanie Snayer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *MAIL.COM* <http://mail.com/>>
> To
> Sent by: "Action [EMAIL PROTECTED]<[email protected]>
> Request System cc
> discussion
> list(ARSList)" Subject
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: BMC Remedy - Copy to Archive
> ORG> and Delete from Source
>
>
> 03/26/2008 05:45
> AM
>
>
> Please respond to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> RG
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------=_Part_6872_1105761.1206524742321
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hey Thivagar
>
> We are in a 7.01 environment but I'm glad to know that this improved on
> performance. Could you perhaps give me a rough indication of the
> following information:
>
> - what your database size is
> - number of records before the archive
> - time taken to save a call before the archive
> - number of records after the archive
> - time taken to save a call after the archive
>
> Anyone else like to share a bit of their archiving info with me?
>
> Regards
> Mel
>
> On 3/26/08, Thivagar Sankaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
>
>
> > **
> >
> > Hi Mel,
> >
> >
> >
> > Recently I have archived the data in my 6.3 environment. I have done
> this
> > to improve the performance and I observe the performance has been
> improve=
> d
> > considerably. But the issue was, the Copy to Archive and Delete from
> > Source option was not working in my environment. Hence I went for Copy
> to
> > Archive Option and deleted the data manually. I have raised this issue
> wi=
> th
> > BMC. But as usual I didn't get a proper response.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > Thivagar Sankaran
> >
> > ITIL =96 Foundataion Certified
> >
> > Remedy Developer
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at
> *www.arslist.org* <http://www.arslist.org/>
> Platinum Sponsor: *www.rmsportal.com* <http://www.rmsportal.com/> ARSlist:
> "Where the Answers Are"
>
> __Platinum Sponsor: *www.rmsportal.com* <http://www.rmsportal.com/>ARSlist:
> "Where the Answers Are" html___
>
> __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
> html___
>
> ***IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment,
> contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended
> solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not
> the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby
> notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is
> strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is
> intended to be a legally binding signature.***
> __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
> html___
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
