Re: Performance of %LEN(%TRIMR(S))

It is hard for me to imagine an iseries takes more than two mins to do this
operation 5012 times. I wrote a test program and ran it under the worst
case senario (where s has a value of 'a'). Execute this operation 5012
times only took 2 secs on our test system. Can you try this?

D s s 18462 inz('a')
D sLen s 5i 0
D ix s 5i 0
D msg s 52

/free

msg = 'Start at ' + %char(%timestamp);
dsply msg;

for ix = 1 to 5012;
sLen = %len(%trimr(s));
endfor;

msg = 'Ended at ' + %char(%timestamp);
dsply msg;


*inlr = *on;

/end-free


"James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mailman.10896.1267054104.2580.rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Albert York wrote:

In my tests, CHECKR performed at least 30% better than %len(%trimr(s))

Definitely something to keep in mind, for cases where I can't simply
calculate the value, based on the lengths of what went into the field.

At any rate, calculating the value, rather than calling %LEN(%TRIMR()) cut
processing time per record by about 31 milliseconds out of a total of
about 55 milliseconds. Or in more concrete terms, the time to process and
deliver 5012 records dropped from over 4 1/2 minutes to about 2, running
on a 170.

Thanks to all who had anything to say.

--
JHHL