I was having a discussion with another admin recently, and he questioned why we were running our process schedulers with Application Engine Server(PSAESRV) enabled. He pointed out that there is very little gained by running PSAESRV, so why have it turned on?
Now, you aren’t completely without loss in turning this off. Depending on what applications you are running and what your system’s needs are, you will have to make that decision for yourself. Check out Doc ID 651970.1 in MOS for a run down on the pros and cons for each method of running App Engines on your process schedulers.
My understanding is that PSAESRV was introduced to cope with the high volume, instant demand nature of remote call App Engines in the PeopleSoft CRM system. Unless you need to execute AE programs in lightning speed then you probably don’t need PSAESRV. The biggest draw back is that if you use PSAESRV and you stop the process scheduler then you’re running AE processes are terminated. Using the traditional method of launching AEs protects your running processes when you stop the process scheduler.
Great site BTW.
You make a great point Graham, about processes not dying when you stop a process scheduler. I suppose the output won’t be published to the Report Repository until the scheduler is started again, but you wouldn’t have a failed App Engine to clean up.
Thanks for the feedback!
Pingback: #7 – Load Balancers | psadmin.io
In deciding whether to use PSAESRV server process or stand-alone PSAE.in the process scheduler, the PeopleTools Performance Guidelines Red Paper (Doc ID 747389.1) very helpfully says the following:
“PSAE is as good as PSAESRV for most practical purposes. If you have an application engine job that runs longer than 10 seconds, PSAE is equivalent to PSAESRV. PSAE has the added advantage of being recycled at the end of each application engine job, cleaning up any outstanding SQL cursors to the database that may have been left behind. Because PSAE recycles after each use, PSAE does not have any possible memory leakage problem that may occupy the precious system memory. In short, PSAE is a cleaner workhorse.”
You have to have a lot of shortlived AE programs to make PSAESRV worthwhile, as is the case in CRM.
If necessary, you could have different pools of process schedulers with and without PSAESRV server processes, and use process groups to direct shortlived AE programs to the process schedulers with the PSAESRV servers.
Thanks for the info, David! I’m going to check out that Red Paper for sure, and great point on the approach using process groups. I never thought of that!