cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - Visit the PTCooler (the community lounge) to get to know your fellow community members and check out some of Dale's Friday Humor posts! X

Report not working after Release Update 10.2 M020-CPS05 -> CPS10

Spiff
8-Gravel

Report not working after Release Update 10.2 M020-CPS05 -> CPS10

Hi,

we have the problem that a specific report is not working any more after updating from

10.2 M020-CPS05 to 10.2 M020-CPS10

and

Oracle 11g to Oracle 12c

Java 1.7.0_80-b15 ("Version 7 Update 80") is installed on the client machines.

The report has to do with promotion requests and the source can be found here:

Query Builder Report: getting the related Promotion Requests of a Drawing

If it's needed, I can post the exact report here.

The page is loading continuously for a very very long time. Sometimes it gives out a report, sometimes an error occurs (in German but should give a hint):

2015-07-07 12-43-42_Report Management - Report Management.png

Other "smaller" reports work without any delay.

Can anybody confirm this? This is a pretty urgent issue since the report is used by many persons every day.

Thanks!

David

6 REPLIES 6
Marco_Tosin
21-Topaz I
(To:Spiff)

David,

have you tried selecting only one attribute at a time and then run your report?

Maybe some DB index could miss, so running your report only with one attribute you could understand if this is your case and which attribute impact on report performance.

Marco

Hi Marco,

I followed your hint but this doesn't work. It always takes that long.

I have to correct my first post: the error which is shown there does NOT have to do with the behaviour of the report execution! It was an unhappy coincidence that the error came up while running the report.

It's "only" that the report takes very long (about 6-10 minutes. before update: 2-8 seconds).

David

Marco_Tosin
21-Topaz I
(To:Spiff)

David,

my hint was because it seems some kind of performance problem.

How many columns (attributes) and rows have your report?

Did you know the differences that exists from selecting in query builder attributes with the red arrow instead of others?

Sorry if I ask something that you already know.

Marco

Hi Mario,

the performance was no issue before implementing the updates. What could be the cause after updating? Maybe security settings? But then I believe it should not work any more.

The report has 25 columns and the last one I ran had 16 rows. It takes about 6 minutes to be generated. There is no recognizable influence on the server performance (CPU & RAM) when executing several of these reports parallel.

I run the report with a direct URL with parameters included - not within the standard "generate" page. So I don't know what you mean with the red arrow.

These are the exact report settings:

2015-07-07 15-15-40_Query Builder_ Promotion Request-Informationen.png

2015-07-07 15-15-59_Query Builder_ Promotion Request-Informationen.png

2015-07-07 15-16-20_Query Builder_ Promotion Request-Informationen.png

2015-07-07 15-19-29_Query Builder_ Promotion Request-Informationen.png

Thanks!

David

Marco_Tosin
21-Topaz I
(To:Spiff)

David,

starting from Windchill 10 it is no more necessary to use criteria to choose an attribute as a filter.

It's sufficient to use a persistent attribute (those with green arrow), instead of a derived.

In this document Resource for reporting there is an attached presentation https://www.ptcusercommunity.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/6348-56-73173/_Reporting6.2.pptx

Take a look at slide 15 of this presentation to see what I mean with green arrow.

Marco
BineshKumar1
13-Aquamarine
(To:Spiff)

Is this performance issue only with reports? I have seen issues where upgrade tool drops certain database indices. It is worth ensuring the presence of all required indices. https://support.ptc.com/appserver/cs/view/solution.jsp?n=CS98135.

Please update the database stats as well.

Also use of like operator with leading wild characters reduces the chance of using index than using a equal operator on a field which is covered by indexes. You can try to profile the action to identify where the time is actually spent.

Thanks

Binesh

Barry Wehmiller International

Announcements


Top Tags