11i Ebs TDB Version 2A

8/11/2019 11i Ebs TDB Version 2A

1/20

1Copyright 2009, IBM Corporation Copyright 2009 Oracle Corporation

PSR Test of Pr oj ect Anal yt i cs f orPeopl eSof t Ent er pr i se, OBI EE 10. 1. 3. 4, DAC7. 9. 6, and I nf or mat i ca 8. 6

Harry Doby

Oracle Corporation

February 2009

Abst r act

This white paper documents performance results of the Extract, Transform, and Load

(ETL) component of the Oracle Business Intelligence Applications for PeopleSoft Project

Analytics.


2/20


Table of contents

Execut i ve Summar y 2

Test Envi r onment 3

Test Obj ect i ves 5

Dat a Expansi on 6

Test Resul t s 7

Concl usi ons 15

Appendi x A - - Dat abase and OS Tuni ng 16

Executive Summary

As a global leader in enterprise applications, Oracles Applications Unlimited Business Intelligence (AUBI) team is

committed to delivering high performance solutions that meet our customers expectations. Business software must

deliver rich functionality with robust performance. This performance must be maintained at volumes that are

representative of customer environments.

Oracles benchmark testing demonstrates our softwares performance characteristics for a range of processing volumes in

a specific configuration. But it is not intended to include all potential processing requirements. Customers should contact

their hardware vendor for help in determining the software, hardware, and network configurations necessary to support

their complete processing volumes.

A Business Intelligence Application such as Project Analytics provides business executives with a complete solution for

Project Lifecycle Reporting, including for each project:

Profitability Analysis

Cost to Budget

Resource Utilization

Bookings and Backlog

This analytical information is drawn from the enterprise application transaction processing system through the ETL

process. In this case, the test utilized data from PeopleSoft Enterprise 8.9, although it could just as easily come from

Oracle EBS or several other enterprise systems.

Figure 1 below gives a high level view of Oracles Business Intelligence Applications


3/20


Figure 1

Test Environment

The hardware for this project was provided by IBM. Each server identified below is a logical partition (LPAR) within a

single server. A total of 6 LPARs have been configured for two independent Business Intelligence test environments.

PSR will use these environments to test the scaling and performance of various BI development projects. The storage forall LPARs is provided by a single storage array attached to the server. Below is the hardware and software configuration

specific to each of the three servers configured for the Project Analytics PSR Test.

OLTP Server Configuration

Hardware confiiguration:

Machine IBM Power 570 Model 9117-570

Processor POWER5 64-bit

1 processor

Speed 2.2 Ghz

Memory 8192 MB

Storage IBM System Storage DS4700 Fiber array

Fifty-Six 146 GB 10K rpm disks

500 GB allocated

paging: 3072 MB

OS AIX 5.3.7 64-bit

Software configuration:

Oracle DB 10gR2 10.2.0.4

OLTP PeopleSoft Enterprise 8.9


4/20


ETL Server Configuration

Hardware configuration:



1 processor

Speed 2.2 Ghz

Memory 8192 MB



500 GB allocated

paging: 3072 MB

OS AIX 5.3.7 64-bit



Informatica 8.6 HotFix4

DAC Server 7.9.6

OBIEE 10.1.3.4

Java 1.5 JDK

OLAP Server Configuration




1 processor

Speed 2.2 Ghz

Memory 8192 MB



500 GB allocated

paging: 3072 MB

OS AIX 5.3.7 64-bit




5/20


Client Machine Configuration


Machine Dell GX240

Processor 1.5 GHz P4

Memory 1024 MB

Storage C: 38GB

D: 38GB

OS Windows XP SP2


Informatica 8.6 HotFix4 Client

OBIEE 10.3.4 Client

OBIA 7.9.6

DAC 7.9.6 (necessary for installation of DAC on the ETL server)

Oracle Client 10gR2 10.2.0.4

Java 1.5.0_15

Test Objectives

The goal of this test was to determine the amount of time and resources required to Extract, Transform and Load a fixed

workload using the Project Analytics BI application for PeopleSoft.

ETL Process

Figure 2


6/20


Test Methodology

There are two modes that ETL typically operates under: Full Load and Incremental Load. A full load happens whenever

a data warehouse is initially created, or when the time comes to completely refresh the dataset under analysis.

Incremental loads occur on a periodic basis to update the existing warehouse with the latest periods data. The

incremental frequency is determined by the business requirements, and may be daily, weekly or some other increment

that meets the organizations needs.

For the purposes of this test, we created 45 million rows of seed data across 10 key OLTP tables in PeopleSoft 8.9. A full

load processed a total of 112 million rows in approximately 6 hours, while the smaller incremental load processed 37

million rows in slightly more than 1 hour.

Scenario 1: Full Load

Purpose: This test will measure the performance of the extract, transform and load steps with a fully populated OLTP

source database with 4 million unique records to key off of the 9 other supporting tables containing the rest of the seed

data.

Description: Two hundred and seventy workflows were executed in Full Load mode into an empty warehouse database.

Approximately 112 million rows in all will be processed.

Scenario 2: Incremental Load

Purpose: This test will measure the performance of the extract, transform and load steps with a fully populated OLTP

source database, and OLAP target database by adding 1 million unique records to key off of the 9 other supporting tables

containing the rest of the seed data.

Description: Two hundred and seventy workflows were executed in Incremental Load mode into an existing warehouse

database. Approximately 37 million rows in all will be processed.

Data Expansion

Ten key tables from the PeopleSoft 8.9 OLTP database were expanded with test data in order to provide a well defined

starting point for this test. The expansion rules are illustrated in the following table.

Source Table # of rows per table

PS_PROJECT 1,000,000

PS_CA_CONTR_HDR 1,000,000

PS_CA_DETAIL 8,000,000

PS_PROJ_ACTIVITY 8,000,000

PS_CA_DETAIL_PROJ 8,000,000

PS_PROJ_RESOURCE 8,000,000

PS_BI_HDR 1,000,000

PS_BI_LINE 4,000,000

PS_PC_BUD_PLAN 1,000,000

PS_PC_BUD_DETAIL 8,000,000

Total 48,000,000


7/20


Test Results

Full Load Summary Results

Overall Summary APP_ID END_ ETL_R PLAN_RUN_TIME

----------------------------------- --------------- --------- ---------- ------------------------------

Listed in descending time to process PSFT89 22-JA Project 0 days 6 hrs 3 min 33 sec

SESSION_NAME SUCCESS READ WRITE INFA_RUN_TIME

------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- --------- ---------- ------------------------------

SIL_ProjectInvoiceLine_Fact 4000020 327 373 0 days 3 hrs 25 min 7 sec

SIL_ProjectFundingLine_Fact 8000008 701 800 0 days 3 hrs 10 min 51 sec

SIL_ProjectFundingHeader_Fact 8000008 776 878 0 days 2 hrs 52 min 42 sec

SIL_ProjectBudget_Fact 1000000 135 145 0 days 2 hrs 4 min 55 sec

SIL_Project_TaskDimensionHierarchy_Full 8000480 1301 2614 0 days 1 hrs 42 min 50 sec

SIL_ProjectRetention_Fact 1000000 180 208 0 days 1 hrs 33 min 25 sec

SIL_ProjectRevenueLine_Fact 2000000 600 801 0 days 0 hrs 56 min 22 sec

SIL_ProjectCostLine_Fact 1000000 316 364 0 days 0 hrs 53 min 23 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectContract_Full 9000024 2965 5242 0 days 0 hrs 51 min 51 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectFundingHeaderFact_Full 8000008 2852 4657 0 days 0 hrs 47 min 25 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectInvoiceLineFact_Full 4000020 1479 2047 0 days 0 hrs 46 min 57 sec

SDE_PSFT_PersistedStage_ProjectTransactio 2000000 803 2017 0 days 0 hrs 44 min 3 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectFundingLineFact_Full 8000008 3669 5010 0 days 0 hrs 37 min 42 sec

SIL_ProjectTaskDimension 8000479 4612 4614 0 days 0 hrs 30 min 21 secSDE_PSFT_PersistedStage_ProjectTransactio 1000000 664 1764 0 days 0 hrs 29 min 40 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectRetentionFact_Full 1000000 796 2778 0 days 0 hrs 23 min 9 sec

SDE_PSFT_TaskDimension_Task_Full 8000479 6066 6553 0 days 0 hrs 22 min 51 sec

SIL_ProjectRevenueHdr_Fact_Full 500000 472 6173 0 days 0 hrs 18 min 14 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectBudgetFact_Primary 1000000 1187 16394 0 days 0 hrs 14 min 59 sec

SIL_ProjectContractsDimension_Full 9000024 11598 11598 0 days 0 hrs 13 min 31 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectFundingHeaderFact_Primar 0 15445 0 0 days 0 hrs 9 min 32 sec

SIL_ProjectRoleDimension 59 59 59 0 days 0 hrs 8 min 38 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectRevenueLineFact_PS_Full 2000000 5264 5264 0 days 0 hrs 8 min 33 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectFundingLineFact_Primary 0 20888 0 0 days 0 hrs 7 min 15 sec

SIL_DayDimension_GenerateRows5 64 64 64 0 days 0 hrs 6 min 58 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectBudgetFact_PS_Full 1000000 4311 4292 0 days 0 hrs 5 min 36 sec

SIL_ProjectCostLineFact_IdentifyDelete 0 0 0 0 days 0 hrs 5 min 8 secSIL_DayDimension_GenerateRows4 32 32 32 0 days 0 hrs 5 min 7 sec


SIL_ProjectContractsDimension_Unspecif ied 1 15 1 0 days 0 hrs 4 min 38 sec


8/20


Full Load Performance Graphs

OLTP CPU Utilization

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

hr

17:41

:42

18:02

:13

18:22

:43

18:43

:13

19:03

:43

19:24

:13

19:44

:43

20:05

:14

20:25

:44

20:46

:14

21:06

:44

21:27

:14

21:47

:44

22:08

:15

22:28

:45

22:49

:15

23:09

:45

Time (30 Second samples)

CPU% CPU %

CPU Wait %

Chart 1

As the chart indicates, the OLTP system is heavily stressed in the first hour of the ETL process as data is extracted from

the database. Once the transformation and load steps that dominate the workload finish, the OLTP system returns to a

normal state.


9/20


Informatica CPU Utilization

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

hr

17

:41:44

18

:02:14

18

:22:44

18

:43:15

19

:03:45

19

:24:15

19

:44:45

20

:05:15

20

:25:46

20

:46:16

21

:06:46

21

:27:16

21

:47:46

22

:08:17

22

:28:47

22

:49:17

23

:09:47

Time (30 second samples)

CPU% CPU %

CPU Wait %

Chart 2

The ETL server running Informatica carries a major portion of the workload, and so the utilization is extremely high

throughout the test. The work being accomplished on this server is the transformation of OLTP-structured data into an

OLAP star schema which will lend itself to answering questions posed by upper management to better run an enterprise.


10/20


BI CPU Utilization

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

hr

17

:41:36

18

:02:06

18

:22:36

18

:43:06

19

:03:36

19

:24:07

19

:44:37

20

:05:07

20

:25:37

20

:46:08

21

:06:39

21

:27:09

21

:47:39

22

:08:09

22

:28:39

22

:49:09

23

:09:39


CPU% CPU %

CPU Wait %

Chart 3

Since the goal is to get the most data loaded into the data warehouse as quickly as possible, it is normal to have the

processor almost completely consumed.


11/20


BI Disk Throughput

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

1 50 99 148 197 246 295 344 393 442 491 540 589 638 687


DiskThroughput(KB/sec)

Disk Throughput

Chart 4

The disk throughput peaked at 170 MB/sec over a span of approximately 20 minutes.


12/20


Incremental Load Summary Results

Incremental Summary Listing

One Million rows added APP_ID END_TIM ETL_RUN PLAN_RUN_TIME

----------------------------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- ------------------------------

Listed in descending order of processed rows PSFT89 23-JAN-2 Projects - 0 days 1 hrs 12 min 1 sec

SESSION_NAME SUCCESS READ_TH WRITE_T STEP_RUN_TIME

------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------------------------------------------------

SDE_PSFT_ProjectFundingHeaderFact_Full 8000008 4148 6612 0 days 0 hrs 32 min 35 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectFundingLineFact_Full 8000008 5359 7783 0 days 0 hrs 25 min 26 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectInvoiceLineFact_Primary 4000020 36037 36037 0 days 0 hrs 2 min 34 sec


SDE_PSFT_ProjectRevenueLine_Fact_Primar 2500000 5695 6330 0 days 0 hrs 8 min 0 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectRevenueLineFact_PS 2000000 10696 10696 0 days 0 hrs 3 min 30 sec


SDE_PSFT_ProjectRetentionFact_Full 1250000 924 4033 0 days 0 hrs 23 min 53 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectBudgetFact_Primary 1250000 1266 30488 0 days 0 hrs 17 min 14 sec


SDE_PSFT_ProjectCostLineFact_Primary 1250000 2718 3165 0 days 0 hrs 8 min 25 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectRetentionFact_Primary 1250000 3592 3592 0 days 0 hrs 6 min 19 sec

SDE_PSFT_BudgetDimension_Full 1000009 5781 6136 0 days 0 hrs 3 min 24 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectCostLineFact_PS 1000000 5051 5000 0 days 0 hrs 4 min 45 sec

SDE_PSFT_ProjectBudgetFact_PS 1000000 6061 6025 0 days 0 hrs 3 min 30 sec

Incremental Load Performance Graphs

OLTP CPU Utilization

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

hr

1

0:06:19

1

0:10:49

1

0:15:19

1

0:19:49

1

0:24:19

1

0:28:49

1

0:33:19

1

0:37:49

1

0:42:19

1

0:46:49

1

0:51:19

1

0:55:49

1

1:00:19

1

1:04:49

1

1:09:19

1

1:13:49


CPU% CPU %

CPU Wait %

Chart 5

The incremental load curve for the OLTP source database was similar to the full load. However, given the shorter time

span needed to process the additional 1 million seed records, it is a much faster process.


13/20


Informatica CPU Utilization

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

hr

10

:06:19

10

:10:49

10

:15:20

10

:19:50

10

:24:20

10

:28:50

10

:33:20

10

:37:50

10

:42:20

10

:46:50

10

:51:20

10

:55:50

11

:00:20

11

:04:50

11

:09:20

11

:13:50


CPU% CPU %

CPU Wait %

Chart 6

The ETL server running Informatica was being heavily utilized, transforming the OLTP data into the OLAP schema

needed for the warehouse.


14/20


BI CPU Utilization

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

hr

10

:06:14

10

:10:44

10

:15:14

10

:19:44

10

:24:15

10

:28:45

10

:33:15

10

:37:45

10

:42:15

10

:46:45

10

:51:15

10

:55:45

11

:00:15

11

:04:45

11

:09:15

11

:13:45


CPU% CPU %

CPU Wait %

Chart 7

The BI server was almost fully utilized for the ETL processing, and as the next chart will show, the disk throughput was

extremely high.


15/20


BI Disk Throughput

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141


DiskThroughput(KB/Sec)

Disk Throughput

Chart 8

The disk subsystem peaked at almost 60mb/sec of throughput.

Conclusions

This test represents the first test of Project Analytics BI application, so there is no data to compare from previous tests.

However, we have been able to capture valuable performance and capacity planning information from these tests.

The test environment only consisted of single CPU servers, but with SMT (simultaneous multithreading) execution

enabled. The disk subsystem was a DS4700 Fiber array equipped with 56 10K rpm disk drives of 146gb capacity each.

500GB was allocated to each of the three servers. The disk array has an approximate capacity to support 5,000 transfers

per second. Our tests were able to absorb about half of that capacity, while driving the CPUs to 100% utilization for

extended periods of time.

So the overall results of processing 112 million rows in 6 hours for a full load, and 37 million rows in just over 1 hour for

the incremental load is a reflection of both the speed of the ETL software and the capacity of the test environment.


16/20


17/20


OLTP SGA Info

Figure 4


18/20


Informatica SGA Info

Figure 5


19/20


AIX Config Changes:

VMO:

-Default settings:

Minperm%=20

Maxperm%=80

Maxclient%=80

Lru_file_repage=1

-Changes:

# vmo -p -o minperm%=5 -o maxperm%=80 -o maxclient%=80 -o lru_file_repage=0

Setting minperm% to 5 in nextboot file

Setting maxperm% to 80 in nextboot file

Setting maxclient% to 80 in nextboot file

Setting lru_file_repage to 0 in nextboot file

Setting minperm% to 5

Setting maxperm% to 80

Setting maxclient% to 80Setting lru_file_repage to 0

SMIT AIO:

-Default settings:

Minservers = 1

Maxservers=10

Maxreqs=4096

-Changes:

Minservers = 10

Maxservers=50

Maxreqs=16384

Network Settings:

-Default settings:

tcp_recvspace= 16384

tcp_sendspace= 16384

-Changes:

no -p -o tcp_recvspace=262144

no -p -o tcp_sendspace=262144


20/20

20

Copyright IBM Corporation 2009

IBM Corporation

1 New Orchard Road

Armonk, NY 10504

U.S.A.

Produced in the United States of America

June 2009

All Rights Reserved

IBM, the IBM logo, ibm.com, AIX, Power, POWER5, and

System Storage are trademarks or registered trademarks

of International Business Machines Corporation in the

United States, other countries, or both. These and other

IBM trademarked terms are marked on their first

occurrence in this information with the appropriate symbol

( or TM), indicating U.S. registered or common lawtrademarks owned by IBM at the time this information

was published. Such trademarks may also be registered

or common law trademarks in other countries. A current

list of IBM trademarks is available on the Web at

ibm.com/legal/copytrade.shtml.

References in this document to IBM products or services

do not imply that IBM intends to make them available in

every country.

The information provided in this document is distributed

AS IS without any warranty, either express or implied.

The information in this document may include technical

inaccuracies or typographical errors.

Performance is based on measurements and projections

using standard IBM benchmarks in a controlled

environment. The actual throughput or performance that

any user will experience will vary depending upon

considerations such as the amount of multiprogramming

in the user's job stream, the I/O configuration, the storage

configuration, and the workload processed. Therefore, no

assurance can be given that an individual user will

achieve throughput or performance improvements

equivalent to the ratios stated here.

Copyright 2009 Oracle Corporation

Oracle Corporation

500 Oracle Parkway

Redwood Shores, CA 94065

Oracle is a registered trademark of Oracle Corporation

and/or its affiliates.

Documents

11i Ebs TDB Version 2A