|
How often do your user's run this Opnqryf? If it is once a week or something, 30 seg difference is no problem(Processor load speaking). But, if it is use continuously, why don't you create a data path for that opnqryf so the DBMS don't have to build a temporary data path every time. You can do this through SQL or DDS. The performance improvement is amazing. p.d. You have to be careful about cost of a new data permanent data path Vs. a temporary one. Emilio Padilla -----Original Message----- From: Buck Calabro/commsoft <mcalabro@commsoft.net> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com> Date: Thursday, March 18, 1999 9:03 AM Subject: Timeslice/purge settings was: Suppress Query Status Message >On 03/17/99 05:46:43 PM pytel wrote: > >Alexey, > >>Timeslice and Purge settings will not have any noticable influence on >>long-running tasks. > >This is a very interesting topic! >Doesn't TIMESLICE come into play when you have a compute-bound job? >Something like creating large GDDM graphics? When the job goes to disk to >get/put a record, it leaves the activity level, right? Unless the job >occupies the activity level until timeslice end, boosting the timeslice >makes no difference > >The purge setting is mostly useful in a small-memory system, if I recall. >It lets you tell the system if you want the entire PAG paged in one >operation at timeslice end/enter long wait. > >This leaves RUNPTY as the other parameter on the class. Won't a job that >fetches thousands of pages of DASD at RUNPTY(20) will be more of a resource >hog than the same job running at 50? It'll certainly get returned to an >activity level before the RUNPTY(50) job will. > >So, I guess the question here is: for a query, does the processor time >required to build an access path get charged to the interactive job, or to >an internal system task? > >The batch/interactive debate extends into separate memory pools and working >set size. Too often, the interactive memory pool is sized for a smaller >working set that the batch pools. This makes it easier for a batch-type >job to force other jobs' storage to be paged out. This is not a Good Thing >for the interactive job's program pages that've been paged out by DB pages. > >>Suppressing status messages can help, because sending message to display >>device incurs a relatively high overhead (especially when there are many). > >Absolutely! The same is true for writing messages to the job log. Any >time a program/job does extra I/O is a place to look for performance >improvements. > >Buck Calabro >Billing Concepts Inc (formerly CommSoft), Albany, NY >mailto:mcalabro@commsoft.net >+--- >| 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 >+--- > +--- | 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.