Re: FNDSTRPDM memory enhancement

["Ron Hawkins" <hwarangron@xxxxxxx>]

If I understand this correctly, you want to submit a job that will open (and
read one record) each member in a source file and expect that this will then
decrease the amount of time that it takes for another job (either
interactive or batch) to process any of the members that the submitted job
processed?

If thats what you're trying to do, I don't think that would decrease the
time it takes for OTHER jobs to process those members.


Ron


> I have a command I created called FNSTR that searches for a string in any
> source file in any or all libraries in batch.  It has the same options as
> FNDSTRPDM so it is basically a beefed up version of FNDSTRPDM.  As many of
> you have probably noticed, doing a FNDSTRPDM (or 25 then F13) on members
> goes a little slow the first time.  It is slowest when interactive as it
is
> displaying the scan progress.  The second time around on the same command
> on the same set of members goes fast.  My guess it that these members are
> saved in memory since any user doing scans on that set of members goes
> fast.  If you open each member in an RPG program, do a single read, and
> close, I think that places the entire member in memory.  Doing a test on
> this (open, 1 read, close) of each member in a source file in a library
and
> then doing a "25" F13 in that source file showed it being very quick.
Just
> doing an open and close without a read did not speed up the process.
> Every morning a system scan is initiated in batch that basically does a
> DSPFD for all common source physical files to outfiles.  I was thinking of
> taking these resulting outfiles and submitting jobs to batch for each
> library processed for each source file.  Then, whenever someone does any
> type of find, it would be quick.  I think members would open faster too.
> We also have a utility called FNDSRC that uses these outfiles to scan for
> any library containing the input member and source file name.  This
utility
> wouldn't be effected but it comes in very handy.
> Should I do the open, 1 read, close of every source member in batch jobs
(1
> library per job)?  Any system issues that might come up in doing this?
> Am I correct in thinking of this as members stored in memory?  Is this the
> same thing as when a program is replaced while someone is using it and
they
> are running the version still stored in memory until they exit?
> Am I crazy?
>
> Thanks,
> Craig Strong
>
>