The reasonable response would have indicated that the question was too broad and general for a specific answer. In other words - it depends. Regarding the O/S handling caching correctly - caching may not even be an option to the O/S, depending on access method and such. The reasonable response would also mention hardware rather than software issues. Disk access involves actual moving parts. In other words - relatively slow. I think it reasonable to say that it is basically preposterous to think that 100 reads of small amounts of data would ever perform BETTER than 1 read of all the data. At most, I'd say performance characteristics would be identical. Unless, of course, the code that governs the movement of data (and I suppose device microcode for DASD, too) is written such that it's goal is to devise a scheme where 100 reads would perform better than 1 for whatever perverted reason! Gary Guthrie Leif Svalgaard wrote: > > well, it is the same number of bytes to be read, so if the > O/S handles caching correctly it shouldn't matter (as the > time to make 100 calls vs. one call can be neglected). > But the original question was a bit silly (sorry sas). > Without information about record sizes, field sizes, how > many times the program will be run, etc., no reasonable > answer can be given.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.