Skip to Content
author's profile photo Former Member
Former Member

Multiple RFC Destinations


I have 75+ idoc interfaces. some are high priority interfaces and some are low priority interfaces.

We did queue prioritization for those interfaces too....But we have only one RFC destination for

all the interfaces.

We are thinking to go for one more RFC destination(SM59), so that we can route low priority high volume

load through this. This way high priority messages can't be effected.

Is this the right approach of implementing ?



Add a comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

Assigned Tags

Related questions

2 Answers

  • Best Answer
    Posted on Mar 17, 2009 at 09:30 PM


    I don't think anymore RFCs are necesary as this they will not give you

    anything more as RFCs are only pointing to the ERP processes (numer of work processes)

    and this is what defines how quickly the flow will go to ERP

    what you could do is to define all interfaces in WE20 in ERP

    for run by background program

    and then try to stear the program to process then in a different way

    (high and low) - this could speed up high priority interfeaces

    much more then many RFCs I believe

    see also optimizing IDOC inbound perf:

    and OSS note: 399271


    Michal Krawczyk

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Mar 17, 2009 at 09:40 PM


    I do not think using different RFC destination in general can give you some benefits if they point to the same application server, the "bottleneck" is the number of dialog WP.

    But maybe using different logon groups you could be able to give higher priority to a process (which uses a powerfull logon group) then to another one which is using a smaller logon group.



    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Former Member Former Member

      >If it is outbound idoc (ECC-xi-third party), then workprocesses of ECC will be consumed right ? and not XI ? Plz correct me if I am wrong.

      Both WP will be used on ECC and XI

      >If we have only one RFC destination:


      >1. out of 75+ interfaces, e.g if one high volume-low priority interface triggers 10k idocs and after

      >that if high priority interace get triggers, then first high volume-low priority messages will be piled up

      >in RFC destination and after they get processed then only high priority messages will ger process.

      >If We have 2 RFC destination:


      >2. we can route high volume-low priority interface into one RFC destination and high priority interface

      >into another RFC destination. This way high priority interfaces won't be effected

      If both RFC destinations point to the same logon group, WP's to be consumed will be taken from the same "pool" so I see no benefit in separating RFC destinations, it's the same of using a single RFC destination.

      If you use different logon group then it's different, because you can assing more resources to a logon group than to another (this means different number of WPs) and at the end different priority.



Before answering

You should only submit an answer when you are proposing a solution to the poster's problem. If you want the poster to clarify the question or provide more information, please leave a comment instead, requesting additional details. When answering, please include specifics, such as step-by-step instructions, context for the solution, and links to useful resources. Also, please make sure that you answer complies with our Rules of Engagement.
You must be Logged in to submit an answer.

Up to 10 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MB each and 10.5 MB total.