× 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 would say I have looked at my fair share of Synon code over the years. It is indeed ugly, largely due to the generated names. And I wouldn't wish maintaining the generated source on anyone. But just because it is ugly doesn't make it perform poorly. And because the programs are generated, they can, and do, take advantage of variable sharing that both makes the code uglier, harder for a person to maintain (the source), and more performant at the same time (but we don't maintain Synon code at the source level do we). Or you can choose to optimize for size and share subroutines. You can even choose to generate some subroutines inline. Or mix and match, your choice. Better is a very subjective term, and depends on what you are looking for. If you are looking for ease of development and consistency in cranking out CRUD programs, then Synon has a lot of advantages over hand built code, even if you use a template. On the other hand if you need to be able to do modern things, then Synon may not be the best tool for the job. But certainly don't judge Synon programs by looking at the source. Judge them by looking at the model. Otherwise you will come to wrong conclusions.

Mark Murphy
Atlas Data Systems
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----"Slanina, John" <jslanina@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
To: "'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Slanina, John" <jslanina@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 05/31/2017 08:30AM
Subject: RE: Performance - RPG vs Cobol


I would disagree with Synon is better than native. Just take one look at the code and you will see. It at the end of it life as a development tool. It great for creating file edits and displays, but for Performance you have to go native.

John Slanina


-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Murphy/STAR BASE Consulting Inc.
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 8:21 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Performance - RPG vs Cobol

Those two reads are separated by a user input screen though. If you write it yourself with a single locking read before you display the screen, then you could easily have record lock issues when someone pulls up a record, and then steps away from their desk, or maybe goes to lunch. that will produce a much larger performance issue than the wholly unnoticed microseconds taken to read the record to lock it before the update, and if you want to avoid record locking problems, that is how you have to do things anyway. Performance of Synon programs is just as good as any program you might write by hand if it had the same features, maybe better depending on the generation options. Just don't look at the source.

Mark Murphy
Atlas Data Systems
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----"Steinmetz, Paul" <PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
To: "'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Steinmetz, Paul" <PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 05/30/2017 09:39PM
Subject: RE: Performance - RPG vs Cobol


Vinay,

We also use Synon/2E.
We generate all RPGLE.
Beware, Synon/2E (CA 2E) is not current with the RPGLE enhancements over the last several years. (anything since 2014).
The latest release is 8.7, which came out in 2014.
There has not been any enhancements/fixes since.

CA 2E is an awesome developer, but not written for performance.
When doing updates, CA 2E reads the reads the record twice, one file for read only, the 2nd file for read/update.
If performance is an issue, you can do better writing native RPGLE.
However, with the vast improvements in DASD, (SSD) , CPU, and memory, the performance factor is probably buried with all the new hardware.

Paul



-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Vinay Gavankar
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 7:02 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Performance - RPG vs Cobol

Hi,

I was wondering whether there is a performance difference between RPG and Cobol code trying to execute the same functionality which is I/O heavy (rather than calculations).

I realize that a lot might depend on how the actual code is written, but is there a general guideline?

My client uses Synon 2E (which allows you to generate OPM/ILE RPG/Cobol source), and there are some programs which are currently OPM Cobol. We are planning on regenerating them as ILE and we have a choice of doing either RPG or Cobol. Is there any particular reason that we should choose one over the other?

The plan is to change all the programs in the job stream to ILE just to keep them in the same Activation Group.

These are common modules which are being called from a various RPG/Cobol programs.

The programs accept a bunch of parameters. Are there any pitfalls if we convert to ILE RPG in accepting the parameters?
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

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.