Larry, >In the manuals it says that PARMCHECK adds a string of hex values at the >end of COBOL WORKING-STORAGE.
This is true! >I assumed that it also did the same for each 01 level in the LINKAGE >SECTION, which logically made sense that the compiler would acquire another >piece of storage to copy the 01 level to and append the string of hex >values. This is NOT true, PARMCHECK is only checking for a migration problem where the sub program would overwrite storage following WORKIN-STORAGE. PARMCHECK is not for validating all paramter usage. Parameter misuse in general will be the same in COBOL V5/V6 as in earlier COBOL versions, so it is not a migration problem in general, it is only a problem when the subprogram s over-writes storage beyond the end of WORKING-STORAGE. >Removing them one at a time, compiling, new copying, and testing in the >CICS region. With no success, I finally tried removing NOTEST(DWARF). >Eureka, no more CICS GETMAINS for each of the LINKAGE SECTION 01 levels. >Not what I was expecting. None of the documentation suggested that >NOTEST(DWARF) would affect runtime. It should only come into play when >into play when the program ABENDs. >This does affect the time for each transaction a great deal. I have never heard of this, is seems wrong to me. Please open a CASE with IBM service and have us look into this! I have a question for you, why would you use NOTEST(DWARF) instead of TEST(DWARF)? TEST is very efficient these days, many shops run in production with TEST. Cheers, TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
