|
derhamj wrote:
Hi List,Just to check timings I ran a small test to see if the use of %EOF bif with a read operation would be faster or slower then the use of the classicindiactors. I expected a nice clear black hat/white hat answer but alas the V5R2 system that I ran on had to surprise me. When run as a batch job, the Bifs over an 8 million record file won hands down across various times an loadsof the work day. However when the same code was was run against the same fileinteractively, the indicators won. Don't understand. Could someone explain thisto me. Time Slice for both batch and interactive was 500. Run priority forInteractive was 20 and for Batch 50. Batch DWT was 120 and 30 for Interactive.I will continue to use the Bif syntax but it sure seems strange that thesame codeWould provide different results depending on the type of job.Jack Derham
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.