|
Your case is somewhat different from what we are having. We have two datafiles. We do a sequential read from one file, do some processing (like aging..etc) and then write the record to the second file. Typically, the first file is input only and the second one is output only files. These two thus are perfect candidates for SEQONLY parameter. Our record length is 118. So if we dont specify blocking factor, the system by default takes 4096 buffer i.e., a blocking factor of approx 31 in our case. We wanted to increase this so that we can process the job much faster and utilise the CPU time more efficiently. We came up with the formula to calculate the blocking factor for a file based on machine type and record length as for RISC : (64*1024) / RecLen for CISC : (32*1024) / RecLen This way, we are getting a blocking factor of around 272. But I wanted to know is there any other efficient formula that makes the job run faster? If we increase the blocking factor, we get some potential paging problems. Is there any work around to avoid these paging problems but still having a large blocking factor? Thanx in advance for any suggestions. Rgds Venu +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.