× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Your not running on a very old server are you, or processing millions of
records?

With current processing power in the systems unless you are processing
large amounts of data, or processing from multiple system over DDM files,
speed is not normally a big issue. Years ago we kept trying to speed up a
long running report. Gave up on it when the a new system took care of
running time for us, without any code changes.




From:
Rpglist <rpglist@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
"RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)"
<rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:
01/04/2013 10:27 AM
Subject:
Re: Suggestions on Speeding up a program
Sent by:
rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx



Requirements that sales has agreed to with the client.
I was wondering how much if any savings can be trimmed by moving all the
inline variable declarations to actual D specs?

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:37 AM, John McKay <jmckay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Binary, packed and integer fields can affect speed also. I remember
reading somewhere that integer are faster than binary.

I would also reduce the number of jumps in the program, i.e. reduce the
number of functions / subroutines, put more into one, it's messy, but
should gain some speed. Keep the most frequently used functions /
subroutines closer to the body of the program.

Use program optimization.

If you can, reduce the number of files and their record length.
Constraints. triggers, etc will also reduce processing time.

I may have missed something, but why is speed such a particularly high
consideration here?

Regards,
John McKay mba
On 03/01/2013 22:16, Barbara Morris wrote:
On 2013/1/3 2:27 PM, Anderson, Kurt wrote:
Reading files into data structures is supposed to be faster. I don't
know the specifics as to why, so I'm loathe to say, but I believe
it's due to how it moves the entire record into the data structure
instead of moving the data field by field.
You're right about the reason, but using data structures is unlikely to
have any real impact on performance. Although if there are a lot of
date, time, or timestamp fields in the record, it _might_ make a
noticeable difference to use a data structure. But in general, I would
say that the decision to read into a data structure should be based on
other reasons than performance.

--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (RPG400-L)
mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.