Interesting side effect:
A previous employer's programmers used to force a dump by adding 1 to a
character field (redefined as packed).
Comes Cobol 5, and no more S0C7 abends, and MANY transactions that did half
their updates, and did NOT get rolled back.
They nagged IBM into providing a fix (maybe it should be called a patch in
this case) to get back the old operation. Apparently there were in excess of
10K programs using this "technique".

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler
Sent: 10 May 2017 20:57
To: [email protected]
Subject: AW: Re: Performance of Decimal Floating Point Instruction

>Only the back-end optimization routine can tell you that for sure, and it
isn't talking.  Remember though, that back end is reportedly shared with the
Java JIT back end, and is supposed to be "very knowledgeable" about the
fastest way to run code on a given architecture level. 
 

I'm not doubting the knowledge, I'm merely surprised to see their heavy use.
Your point regarding register versus storage operations and cache protection
makes much sense.


>Trust but verify.  Run 5-10 production-volume batch tests of pre-COBOL V5
and COBOL V5 versions of your program, measuring both CPU and elapsed time,
and then average the results.  If there are real savings there, why do we
care how it is done? (Except when we have to debug that abend at
oh-dark-thirty, of course.) 
 


It's not oh-dark-thirty, but I'm wandering in the dark :-) We've got a
program that gets into a loop we cannot explain yet. In an MA-Tune
measurement, 99.9% of the samples show the program being active in always
the same CZXT instruction. Did not make any sense. Next time the job was
looping, we took an SVCDUMP and surprise, surperise, the program seems to be
in a recovery loop. 


That's how I got aware of the heavy floating point usage and got curious.
Not that I expect this to help me solve the problem. As said, It is pure
curiosity.




--
Peter Hunkeler




 


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Reply via email to