Setting parms in CL for PF - Results -- MIDRANGE-L

× 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.

I posted several weeks ago about trying to update a large PF and making CL 
changes to speed up the process.  Several of you made suggestions so here are 
the results.

Each time I did a pass, I first cleared the PF.  I ran the update with all 18 
million records so each record had to be written to the PF.  Next, I ran the 
update again so that it attempted to update each record.  I ran 3 passes:


Pass 1 - No changes MAINT of LF, no changes to NBRRCDS or FRCRATIO
Add portion - 25 hours, 16 minutes
Update portion - 8 hours, 51 minutes


Pass 2 -  
CHGLF   FILE(FILE2LF)  MAINT(*DLY)
OVRDBF  FILE(FILE1) NBRRCDS(16383)  SEQONLY(*YES)
OVRDBF  FILE(FILE2) FRCRATIO(12500)
CALL  PGM(BIGFREAKINUPDATE)
CHGLF   FILE(FILE2LF)  MAINT(*IMMED)

Add portion - 25 hours, 17 minutes
Update portion - 8 hours, 38 minutes


Pass 3 - 
CHGLF   FILE(FILE2LF)  MAINT(*DLY)
OVRDBF  FILE(FILE1) NBRRCDS(32767)  SEQONLY(*YES)
OVRDBF  FILE(FILE2) FRCRATIO(25000)
CALL  PGM(BIGFREAKINUPDATE)
CHGLF   FILE(FILE2LF)  MAINT(*IMMED)

Add portion - 25 hours, 5 minutes
Update portion - 8 hours, 38 minutes



I guess I expected to see better results in Pass 2 or 3.  Thoughts?

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.