|
> From: Joe Pluta > > > From: Booth Martin > > > > My experience with readE is that its a pig. > > You're saying that coding READ with an HLL equals comparison in your > loop runs faster than a READE? WOW. I am absolutely floored. With a single-field key, READ/compare is about 10% faster than READE. Who'd'a thunk? Code below. SCCIR is a keyed physical file with four fields, two of which are keys. The file has 69000 records, of which some 2700 are matched by the key specified in the program. Results, 22825 msec for the READE, 20027 for the READ, a reduction of 13 or 14 percent (depending on your calculation). I then changed it for a key with far fewer hits (12) and increased the loops to 1000, and the decrease was even more dramatic - over 30%. The program was compiled with all debug information and no optimization. You may want to change those settings if you want to try this on your own. FSCCIR IF E K DISK Dtime1 s z Dtime2 s z Dtime3 s z Dx s 10u 0 Dd1 s 10u 0 Dd2 s 10u 0 Dmsg s 50 DLOOPS c 100 Did s 8 inz('DF000135') C key klist C kfld id C TIME TIME1 C do LOOPS C key SETLL sccir C key reade sccir C dow not %eof(sccir) C key reade sccir C enddo C enddo C TIME TIME2 C do LOOPS C key SETLL sccir C read sccir C dow not %eof(sccir) and irid = id C read sccir C enddo C enddo c time time3 c time2 subdur time1 d1:*ms c time3 subdur time2 d2:*ms c div 1000 d1 c div 1000 d2 c eval msg = 'D1: ' + %char(d1) + c ', D2: ' + %char(d2) c msg dsply C eval *inlr = *on
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.