If you're looking at sheer performance, a RACF profile can be RACLISTed, reducing I/O overhead to zero. That's a trivial reason for preferring the (obviously superior) RACF solution, but it might win the bet. Or lose it--you didn't exactly tell us where you put your money. ;-)
. . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [email protected] P S <[email protected] M> To Sent by: IBM [email protected] Mainframe cc Discussion List <[email protected] Subject .edu> "Cost" of RACF vs. small file I/O 03/25/2009 04:52 PM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected] .edu> Ignoring for the moment the very tangible benefits RACF bestows beyond just the obvious, do y'all think it's more expensive (FSVO "expensive") to: - read a 1-block QSAM file - make a RACF request ? This will settle an argument (maybe!) about whether it's worth stuffing something in RACF just because "It's RACF so it's good". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
