> Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK? EOV processing.
> There's little reason to use BSAM. NOTE, POINT. > The consensus in this thread has been, > QSAM is at least nearly as good as BSAM; > perhaps better There's a good deal of overlap between the BSAM and QSAM code. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 3:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Overlapped I/O completion On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 12:43:38 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote: >On 3/19/2021 12:35 PM, Joseph Reichman wrote: >> So this is what I will do >> >> I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the >> WAIT using the ECB from the DECB >> Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O >> I’ll issue a WAIT for that >> etc > >Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT. > Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK? I never did. There's little reason to use BSAM. The consensus in this thread has been, QSAM is at least nearly as good as BSAM; perhaps better because it knows the best way to deal with current devices, when to WAIT, etc. And has far less coding effort. GET LOCATE might save a few instructions/record vis-a-vis GET MOVE. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
