Steve, Do you know if the file is opened/closed/reopened/etc., or is it simply opened/read/closed? (Or is this an output file instead?)
If we're to help (and I for one would be pleased to do so) we'll need to know the I/O flow to understand where the bottlenecks are. Presuming the file is accessed via QSAM, you CAN use Hiperbatch (but if your file is opened/closed/reopened/etc., then you might need to play a game or two to keep hiperbatch happy). There may be better ways to get speed out of this for your batch window though. -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI (Tuning is simply a matter of moving the bottlenecks until they are no longer significant.) On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:12:01 -0800, Kannard, Stephen wrote: >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. > >---------- > john gilmore wrote: > >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? > >>From: "Kannard, Stephen" <[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
