Home Service Manager

Security Scoping/Performance issues - Catalog Item Groups and Open form performance

Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
Wondering if anyone else is running into the same. About to open a MS Case, but also interested in the community feedback.

Running into issues with opening work items taking a few minutes to open (CR's most heavily affected as they have the most related Activities)

Use Case (All testing done on primary workflow server) SCSM 2012 R2 UR9
Have an Advanced Operator role for a specific user group =Testing
On the testing role 
  • Queues = All access
  • Configuration items = All access
  • Catalog Item Groups = All access
  • Tasks = All access
  • Views = All access
  • Form Template = All access
Users = Smith, Joe

When Joe opens the console he can access all work items without issue. 

I make one change
Catalog Item groups = Remove All access and set to provide access to only the selected group. Then place check box in all listed group.

When Joe opens the console and attempts to open a CR it takes about 3 minutes to open the work item before editing can occur. 
Effectively this should have not changed any rights. But had major impact on performance.

On top of this have a end user role that is scoped to specific catalog item groups and when a AD Group that contains Joe the issue occurs.

Best Answer


  • Options
    Peter_SettlePeter_Settle Customer Advanced IT Monkey ✭✭✭

    I don't have this issue now, but can remember when we were implementing the system something along the same line s happening.

    However nowadays we tend to schedule in the truncating of CI$User , CI$DomainGroup and LastModified. this is done on a monthly basis and we don't seem to have experienced the issue since.

    I am not saying this is the answer by any means, just that we done appear to experience it.

  • Options
    Konstantin_Slavin-BoKonstantin_Slavin-Bo Customer Ninja IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭
    I'm guessing you're taking a performance hit because of SCSM needs to check the scope before opening the WI. When it's at 'all access' on all "steps" (Queues, CIs, Task, etc) it probably skips the scope check altogether, and you experience the faster load times. If just one of them is not at 'all access', it needs to lookup the access before it can actually open the WI. It also tracks well when the end user role issue you mentioned. You could check this by setting Catalog Items Group back to 'all access' and try changing e.g. Configuration Items to be limited. I'm guessing you would probably experience the same.

    That being said, the performance hit you're taking seems quite substantial, and completely out of proportion to the operation, which needs to be performed.

    I don't know if some kind of misconfiguration could cause this issue, but you could try to check if any procedures takes longer to run, when you have scoped the access in the user role. You can check which queries are eating up the cpu with this: https://www.johnsansom.com/how-to-identify-the-most-costly-sql-server-queries-using-dmvs/
    And also this post regarding performance counters could be relevant: https://www.johnsansom.com/how-to-identify-the-most-costly-sql-server-queries-using-dmvs/

    But it does mostly sound like a bug.
  • Options
    Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Opened the Case with MS and there first thought is that is just how the system works. But we will see where the case goes. To me doesn't make sense that limiting the Offerings on the front end slows down the back end. There are going to replicate in there lab and get back to me.
  • Options
    Konstantin_Slavin-BoKonstantin_Slavin-Bo Customer Ninja IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭
    It does seem very weird, that it affect performance that much, but it makes kinda sense to me. You are not limiting on the "front end", you are actually setting the limitation back end, as you are restricting access to specific objects. This happens in the "back end" on the CMDB. If a user role has access to everything, it makes sense that a special flag for this is set, and the access right check is skipped altogether. Kinda like when an analyst on the portal has access "to ALL work items"; no checking is done for the individual object, but everything is just loaded.

    When access is limited by just 1 area / object / class, SCSM has to check for all objects, as e.g. a CR can contain a CI, to which access is limited, or a relationship to a RO, to which access is limited. Therefore, to me, makes sense that the performance is affected when using scoped access.

    But again, that being said, there's something wrong if it takes ~3 mins to open a CR - that's just not right. If you can, please let us know, when you get more info from MS!

    Btw, are you running SCSM 2016 or 2012 R2?
  • Options
    Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    SCSM 2012 R2
  • Options
    Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Did this ever improve, after working with MS?
  • Options
    Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    No, right now fighting red tape to get the case opened. 
  • Options
    Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Truly sorry to hear that, but I understand all too well.  I am going to get a case opened here, and I will gladly share the outcome, if we are able to make a difference.

    We are not seeing too much of an issue when opening a ticket, but saving for scoped users takes an unacceptable amount of time.  We do not scope much other than templates, but have plans to scope many more objects (Service Offerings, SLO's), so this is very concerning.  Working with the PrePopulateCI and other settings, for example, have not provided any relief.

    We are on 2016, but I do not expect that to make much of a difference when compared to a 2012 R2 environment.
  • Options
    Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have a ticket open with MS, and they acknowledged the issue after observing it over screen share (and that it can run lightning-fast for other users) but we are still trying to find root cause.

    I have a question though:  Do you have the Survey App installed/configured?  The scoping on one of the Survey roles has me wondering if it could be (partially?) to blame.
  • Options
    Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Survey App is only installed on my staging environment, never made it into production.
    Still fighting red tape to get the ticket open. 

    I am running another add-on that I fear might be componding the issue.
    The more activities the work item has the longer it takes to load. But that could just be the linked work items not the add-on. 
  • Options
    Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    I do see longer load times when there are more activities and/or more CI's related to a ticket.  Basically the more objects that are referenced in the type projection, regardless of type.

    Still no root cause from MS yet, but we are still going back and forth and working through this.
  • Options
    Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    This same ticket is still ongoing, but I have obtained much better information from various folks at MS along the way, and would like to share some tips that may be helpful to the rest of you:

    For those who use a SQL 2016 (or 2014) DB:
    • Set the compatibility level of the ServiceManager DB to 110 (equivalent to 2012 R2)
    • SQL 2014 and SQL 2016 use a different calculation for the Cardinality Estimator than 2012 did.  SCSM performs much more poorly with the new calculation, but one can set a trace flag (9481) to revert back to the old calculation, per this link: new-functionality-in-sql-server-2014-part-2-new-cardinality-estimation/ (affects all DBs in the instance). 
    • The particular SP causing nearly all of the issues is dbo.p_UserRoleSelectAccessToMultipleEntities.  It is possible to alter this SP to use this trace flag instead of the entire instance (OPTION (QUERYTRACEON 9481))
    For everyone:
    • There is a registry setting of "GroupCalcPollingIntervalMilliseconds" which defaults to a very low/frequent number that contributes to some of the performance degradation associated with scoping.  It can be changed with the following command (you can adjust the milliseconds as desired):
    • REG ADD "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\System Center\2010\Common" /v "GroupCalcPollingIntervalMilliseconds" /t REG_DWORD /d 600000 /f
    • Indexing is a must for not only the ServiceManager DB, but also the ServiceManagement DB for the Cireson portal.  Talk with your DBA team about this--you will likely discover a significant number of opportunities to apply indexes that speed up operations that your users complain about.
    • Check the number of concurrent users per management server.  Basic, right?  But be aware that one particular user might show up many multiple times due to having more than one browser open or the API and SDK calls (including some workflows) showing up more than once for separate calls.  The calculation for how much CPU, RAM, and how many management servers you should have in your environment is essentially based on this concurrent user count (simplifying a little here).  Do not count your users once if the system counts them more than once.  Our estimate when we first designed the environment was significantly low due to expecting users to use only one session at a time.
    • Check your groups and catalog item groups, and make sure there are no circular references (two groups use each other to determine the inclusion of objects for each other--which is as bad as it sounds).  I had one of these--with absolutely no idea how it was allowed to exist or how/when it was created--and correcting it provided an instant performance boost.  You probably do not look at these very often, so just have a look to make sure you do not see anything like this in yours, once in a while.
    As I said, I am still working with Microsoft but we have made significant progress.  Hopefully, these tips can you as well!
  • Options
    Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    "For those who use SQL 2016 or 2014 DB"
    Are you referring to users of SCSM 2012R2?
    We are currently building SCSM 2016 running on SQL 2016.

    And thanks for the great info. Will review all the points.
  • Options
    Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Great question, I should have made that more clear:  I am referring to SCSM 2016 on SQL 2014 or SQL 2016. 

    This might also apply to SCSM 2012 R2, and I have my own personal suspicions that it does (although I also do not recall if SQL 2016 is even supported for SCSM 2012 R2), but I could not say for sure.  If you still have a ticket open, Microsoft would definitely be able to speak to that.
  • Options
    Brian_WiestBrian_Wiest Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Went thru the write up and we have done most of these via previous calls with MS for the SQL. Reviewing the remaining with the team. 
    Just to note we are running SCSM 2012 R2 UR9 with SQL 2014
Sign In or Register to comment.