一些通过SAP ABAP代码审查得出的ABAP编程最佳实践

  • 时间:
  • 浏览:0

In product / IObject area, the best practice is to use OPEN CURSOR / FETCH NEXT CURSOR to access big DB table.

The original dump due to out of memory issue could be eliminated by replace SELECT with OPEN CURSOR statement.

通过比较,第二种出理 方案的数率是第一种生活的四倍。

1. Check the file path whether it is IPG or MIDH or TPG related. If not, quit the report.

Current logic is:

processing.

It is an expensive operation to open a file in application server with 1000MB file size.

1. 这有一另另一个IF ELSE分支里检测的条件着实逻辑上来说全部全是同一类,应该合并到有一另另一个IF分支里进行检查:

通过下面这段代码模拟有一另另一个费时的ABAP多线程池池 :

1. Open the file in application server

1. The more CPU & DB time spent in ZINSERT, the better performance will be gained by using

parallel processing (Asynchronous RFC call).

一种生活函数里执行一大堆计算,或者把传入的product ID写到一张自定义表ZJERRY1里。

The correct logic should be:

这是有一另另一个性能问题报告 图片。使用ABAP原生支持的NOT IN关键字可否获得更好的性能。性能评测如下:

Loop at all service BOM, check whether the ID in current loop does exist in validation table lt_valid_prod or lt_valid_sp. If so, delete them via DELETE TABLE XXX FROM .

调用一种生活函数的代码:

一种生活法子和直接用SELECT相比,能显著减少内存消耗量。

2. Read the file content line by line

2. Handle with each line directly without evaluate file path in the BIG loop.

3. If the file is regarding IPG or MIDH or TPG, handle with each line separately

2. The more number of ZINSERT call, the better performance will be gained by using parallel

肯能需要用ABAP OPEN SQL读取一张含晒 海量记录的数据库表,如此 推荐使用OPEN CURSOR进行分块读取。

Improvement: use DELETE XXX WHERE product_id NOT IN . It is more efficient when lt_srv_bom_file has a huge number of records. See comparison below ( unit: second )

Although this solution will spend almost the same time to fetch the data from DB, it has far less memory consumption compared with using SELECT to fetch ALL data from DB at one time.

注意第二种方案使用STARTING NEW TASK达到的并发执行效果:

定义有一另另一个ABAP函数: