Just thought of sharing this information so that it helps someone.
I just got the feedback from Automic Support that , even though we set PERFORMANCE to N, the collection data still will be happening.
Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2019 11:15 AM
From: Krum Ganev
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Hello @Carsten Schmitz
In Client 0, the vara object UC_SYSTEM_SETTINGS create another Key called 'PERFORMANCE' and in Value put 'N'.
We did not implement this yet.
Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2019 11:12 AM
From: Carsten Schmitz
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Hi @Krum Ganev,
thanks for that info.
Where do you disable it, have you already discovered that? There are literally zero Google search results for these settings and no hits in the documentation. UC_SYSTEM_SETTINGS? Or the ini file?
------------------------------
I will not respond to PM asking for help unless there's an actual reason to keep the discussion off of the public forums.
Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2019 10:45 AM
From: Krum Ganev
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
@Carsten Schmitz i can not confirm or deny that unfortunatelly.
The support person wrote :
"As I mentioned previously, the PMMA tables are normally handled by the Automation Engine and from your side nothing needs to be done. During the original production down we saw long calls against the PMMA tables. The performance settings I referenced will disable this. I believe this is used for telemetry data. Turning this off should have little risk and is a simple troubleshooting step."
As you can see this is not a definative answer or solid statement from their end.
The only advises was to set the Performance to value N , increase the index rebuild frequency and reduce the WP/JWPs count.
Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2019 10:19 AM
From: Carsten Schmitz
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Very interresting.
I just checked, we have 35M records in our PMMAV and another 3.2M in PMMA, and I also find these log messages:
20191117/095350.890 - U00011847 'PERFORMANCE' set to 'Y'.
20191117/095350.891 - U00011847 'PERFORMANCE_MEASURE_INTERVAL' set to '000000001'.
20191117/095350.893 - U00011847 'GENERATE_UNDEFINED_SCRIPT_VARS' set to 'N'.
20191117/095350.895 - U00011847 'PERFORMANCE_CHECK_INTERVAL' set to '000000005'.
We have issues with the PWP of the production systems hanging on startup for some weeks now, I wonder if this has anything to do with it. I think I will set "PERFORMANCE" to "N" right away. I remember having had a conversation about this parameter, and that it lacks documentation and has a useless name many months ago, but it looks not much if anything came of it.
One question @Krum Ganev, @Tatjana Radic: Are these PMM* tables used only for the telemetry plan, and if so, did Automic issue any guidance on how to clean them out?
Thanks!
------------------------------
I will not respond to PM asking for help unless there's an actual reason to keep the discussion off of the public forums.
Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2019 10:01 AM
From: Krum Ganev
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Hello All,
Recently we experienced major issue with our Production AE, the whole system went in hung state due these PMM* tables. (reference cases {Case#20099941} ## RCA for 20099839 has been updated)
The WPs was overflowed with a delete statements against the PMM* tables which took extremly long due staled indexes.
We are doing index rebuild every sunday and the issue occur on Tuesday night. At that time there was 170m records in PMMAV.
Adhoc index rebuild and cold restart of the AE resolved the issue. The official statement is that we oversized our system which caused the abnormal record count and staled indexes.
We were advised to set PERFORMANCE to N and reduce the WP/JWP count. The other two settings were not mentoined but it looks logical to have a control on the check interval and measure interval.
Our decision is to first decreese the WP/JWP count and afterwards , if still necessary , to dissable the Performance.
Did anyone tried these three parameters? Is there a possitive outcome?
And more logical question - if you are non-PLA customer why you will need these performance metrics as they are related to Telemetry (at least we was told so).
It looks like many things are missing from the official documentation. Like the alternation of the JWP - they are now multi-thread and can maintain up to 5 threads. Previously they was single-thread. Hence the recomendation for the total count of JWPs are outdated.
Best Regards,
Krum Ganev
Automic SME
DXC.Technology
Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2019 01:21 AM
From: Tim Quakulinsky
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Hi Tatjana,
unfortunately these settings are not documented. In the PWP server log I find the following undocumented messages/parameters:
'PERFORMANCE' set to 'Y'.
'PERFORMANCE_MEASURE_INTERVAL' set to '000000001'.
'PERFORMANCE_CHECK_INTERVAL' set to '000000005'.
However, I do not find a message for PERFORMANCE_KEEP_DAYS...
I created ticket 20111943 for the missing documentation. Cross your fingers!
For your information: I already created a ticket in the last days, because I saw unknown warnings about PMM* in the JWPs.
Best regards,
Tim
------------------------------
Automation Evangelist
Fiducia & GAD IT AG
---
Mitglied des deutschsprachigen Automic-Anwendervereins FOKUS e.V.
Member of the German speaking Automic user association FOKUS e.V.
Original Message:
Sent: 11-20-2019 09:35 AM
From: Tatjana Radic
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Hi @Maria Joseph Vimalan, you can reduce the value of PERFORMANCE_KEEP_DAYS to lower value (5 or 10 for example) in UC_SYSTEM_SETTINGS. The default value is set to 30 (days).
This value defines how many days the data is stored in these tables, after which the data will be removed and countdown will start again.
------------------------------
Product Manager - Automation
CA Technologies, A Broadcom Company
Original Message:
Sent: 11-19-2019 02:41 PM
From: Vimalan
Subject: Increasing PMM* Tables
Dear Experts,
We are running AE on 12.2.1 and we are planning to upgrade to 12.3.1 shortly. With 12.2.1 version , we are noticing the following tables growing on dailiy basis.
TableName |
SchemaName |
RowCounts |
PMMA |
dbo |
15246922 |
PMMAV |
dbo |
121353884 |
Can anyone let me know if any optimizations can be done for these two tables ? What would be impact if we truncate the entries of these two tables.
Kindly share your expertise
Thank you in advance.
Best Regards
Vimalan