A 2002 SHARE presentation shows OPT as 4-17% faster. http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=2231&context=SS6SG3&dc=DA4A3 0&dc=DA470&uid=swg27001515&loc=en_US&cs=utf-8&lang=en
Don Imbriale >-----Original Message----- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >Of Julian Levens >Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 1:02 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: COBOL and CA-Intertest Batch > >Hmmm > >In the past when managing COBOL build options and Xpediter. We decided not >to optimise at all. We were not having performance problems (any we did were >to do with DB2/SQL within the programs), hence optimisation was deemed >unnecessary. This decision made code management much easier and allowed the >possibility to debug code in all environments (although we never did in >production). This decision was made very early in the project. > >I was told that optimisation would only gain us about 4% (this was mid to >late 90s) - is this true. Anybody have better statistics/analysis of the >benefits of COBOL optimisation with today's compilers? Has optimisation >improved a lot since then? > >If the optimisation gains are not that great (YMMV) maybe its not always >worth turning it on. Of course, if optimisation of code is already >established in production, I very much doubt its worth the change/risk. > *********************************************************************** Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account activity contained in this communication. *********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
