Thank you for all inputs.

The below information given to us by IBM states we are required by CICS to 
use LINK (or XCTL) and can't use CALL; we pass a COMMAREA and use EXEC CICS 
commands within our called module.

Also, there is no evidence of a performance hit.  But since we can't use CALL 
as 
stated above, we need to use LINK no matter what.

Our IBM source stated the following:

'According to the z/OS C/C++ Programming  Guide, SC09-4765, 
the system() function is not supported under CICS.     
However, there are two EXEC CICS commands that give you similar          
functionality they are:                                                  
 EXEC CICS LINK                                                          
 EXEC CICS XCTL                                                          
   So to answer your question no a CALL can not be done.'                 
                                                        
'As far as high CPU consumption (slow performance) there are no known    
issues in the area of a EXEC CICS LINK and high CPU.'

John

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Rick Arellanes
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 8:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler Question

The COBOL Performance Tuning paper talks about the performance differences of 
using EXEC CICS LINK vs COBOL dynamic CALL. Perhaps this will be helpful to 
you. You can find the performance tuning paper on the COBOL page at: 
http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/cobol/library/ (scroll down near the 
bottom of the page). The most current one is Enterprise COBOL Version 4 Release 
2 Performance Tuning (which is at the top of the list). The CICS section starts 
on page 27.

Rick Arellanes
IBM COBOL Development and Performance


On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 23:21:59 +0000, John Weber <j...@fiteq.com> wrote:

>We have a COBOL CICS module being called using the LINK command.
>
>Here is the interface call:
>
>EXEC CICS
>                LINK PROGRAM('PROGRAM1')
>                RESP(WS-RESP)
>                COMMAREA(WS-COMMAREA)
>END-EXEC
>
>However, it has been brought up that creating  a bound module instead of using 
>LINK can speed up response time.
>
>Is this binding compiler in question CTRCOBMOD?  If so, is this worth pursuing?
>
>Thanks a lot...
>
>John
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to