Re: RE: LIBL limitation of 25 libraries

I would think that the overhead is not linked to the number of entries in the 
libl but to the number of object the system have to go trought. I think that 
there is not a big difference when searching in one library with 1000 object or 
in 10 libraries with 100 object. We would also nee to add to every program the 
logic to handle the add and remove of entries in the libl. And they are the 
occasional instances when an application need to call programs from another 
application which complicates even further the logic involved.

Denis Robitaille
Cascades inc.
Tel: 819-363-5187
DRobitaille@cascades.com

>>> Tim McCarthy <TimM@softwarejungle.com> 11/27 12:25 pm >>>
Most people don't appear to consider the overhead involved if the system
is searching for objects using *LIBL. The bigger the LIBL the greater
the overhead. The LIBL should not be something recklessly thrown
together ("just add it to the library list") and libraries should be
added and removed as applications are entered and exited. 25 entries is
more than enough - if it appears not to be, you need to reconsider your
LIBL design.



+---
| 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
+---