Just a couple of "COBOL sequential file" issues that MIGHT impact this.
1) If the file is a "variable length" file, then make certain that you have the AWO compiler options specified. 2) If you have any internal SORT statments, make certain that you have specified FASTSRT compiler option. *** Always a place to check, make certain that you specify NOSSRANGE for "performance sensitive" jobs. Finally, you might want to review the entire "tuning" paper at: http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27001475&aid=1 "Kannard, Stephen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > Language is cobol. The latest analysis shows dasd excps of 9,494,372 for one > seq dd, we felt that if > we could get better buffering run time would improve. > > Stevek. > > -----Original Message----- > From: john gilmore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 6:24 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: The amazing shrinking batch window. > > > Tell us more about your problem and the programming language in which you > are dealing with it. > > Is there really only one file involved? Or are there three, as in a > classical MFU? > > John Gilmore > Ashland, MA 01721-1817 > USA > > >From: "Kannard, Stephen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: The amazing shrinking batch window. > >Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 17:19:15 -0800 > > > >Hi, We're trying to squeeze more performance from the amazing shrinking > >batch processing window, we would like to use Hiperspace, the file is not > >vsam , but perhaps there is a 3rd pty product that could help. > > > >Thank You. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
