× 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.


  • Subject: RE: This way or that?
  • From: "Bale, Dan" <DBale@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:59:04 -0400

I'm sorry, but the developer is concerned with the microseconds it takes to
add a member to a file once per day per user?  Versus wasting 1GB of DASD?
Does he sell DASD on the side?

If it's as simple as you're saying, Ken, at a bare minimum, I would clear
the job's member at signoff.  Maybe even clear all the file's members at IPL
or other restricted state.

But you're asking if we were designing this app to optimize the use of
system resources...  I certainly wouldn't leave 500 members in a work file.
I would have included the device name as a key field in the work file and
designed my apps accordingly.  And clear *ONE* member at IPL.

Has your developer ever heard of the KISS principle?

- Dan Bale

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Graap, Ken [SMTP:keg@exchange.gasco.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 4:30 PM
> To:   'Midrange'
> Subject:      This way or that?
> 
> Question - 
> 
> We have a process that adds a member (member name=device name) to a file
> which is then used as a work file for the current job. Once a member has
> been added it is never cleared or removed.
> 
> At any time there may be as many as 500 members in this file and each
> member
> may contain several thousand records (1,000 - 50,000).
> 
> There are also several logical views defined over this file. The first
> view
> has 6 formats and three other views have one each. So at any one time
> there
> can be up to 2000 indexes all defined with Access Path Maint *IMMED. 
> 
> When everything is added up, this 'work file' takes up 259MB of disk space
> for data and 814MB of disk space for indexes. A total of over 1GB. 
> 
> The developer who designed this process says that he doesn't remove these
> file members when a user signs off  in order to avoid the overhead of
> adding
> a member each day when a user starts an application session.
> 
> If you were designing this application to optimize the use of system
> resources (disk utilization, program performance, backup recovery etc)
> would
> you remove these work files daily and add new members when needed or would
> you leave the work files in place as we are doing?
> 
> I'm looking forward to all your thoughts....
> 
> Kenneth
+---
| 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 thread ...


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.