This performance issue is what was "fixed" in LE at some point. IBM did have a well documented option that would make it work like it used to.
Dennis Roach GHG Corporation Lockheed Marten Mission Services FDOC Contract 2100 Space Park Drive LM-15-4BH Houston, Texas 77058 Voice: (281) 336-5027 Cell: (713) 591-1059 Fax: (281) 336-5410 E-Mail: dennis.ro...@lmco.com All opinions expressed by me are mine and may not agree with my employer or any person, company, or thing, living or dead, on or near this or any other planet, moon, asteroid, or other spatial object, natural or manufactured, since the beginning of time. > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On > Behalf Of John McKown > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 8:35 AM > > I generally agree. However, IIRC, the PL/I compiler did this type of > operation long ago. And when somebody would specify large buffers, then > the > compiler would cause a large paging spike due to initializing a couple > of > meg(?) of storage to x'00'. > > -- > John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
