On an lpar with 25g of memory we run the COBOL 6.2 compiles with a region of
512M.
This is from a program that has well over 25,000 lines of code. Had OPT(0) set
plus lots of debug stuff turned on.
IEF373I STEP/COB6 /START 2022109.0219
IEF032I STEP/COB6 /STOP 2022109.0223
CPU: 0 HR 01 MIN 39.91 SEC SRB: 0 HR 00 MIN 00.63 SEC
VIRT: 764K SYS: 428K EXT: 141580K SYS: 16012K
ATB- REAL: 506368K SLOTS: 0K
VIRT- ALLOC: 533M SHRD: 0M
Part of what I is in the output from Rex that would concern me if all the
paging. I'm going to take a leap and say that the overhead of the paging could
cause extended run time. One of the things we have found in doing compiles is
to insure you what sized the SYSUTx datasets. In our case we are using
SPACE=(CYL,(50,15)) across all 15 datasets.
As others have said the compile uses more memory and uses more CPU compared to
the COBOL 4.
Paul Feller
GTS Mainframe Technical Support
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 5:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: I knew Cobol 6.3 takes more resources to compile
than 4.2 but should I be concerned about how much?
It will be interesting to see what IBM responds to your ticket. Please share
if you can when it is closed.
I wonder if using the pre-processor vs the co-processor for the CICS compile
would affect the total time, if you are able to set up JCL to allow that. We
don't use the co-processor here and can't easily set up to use it (peculiar
SCLM issues) , so I don't know what kind of memory/time factor(s) it adds to
the compile step.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 6:11 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: I knew Cobol 6.3 takes more resources to compile
than 4.2 but should I be concerned about how much?
Hi Peter,
I agree that IBM has warned of significantly higher CPU and memory
requirements, and we've seen increases, but to go from .3 CPU seconds to over
500 - a 1500 fold increase seems more than a bit excessive to me.
We're using the CICS coprocessor.
Rex
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 3:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: I knew Cobol 6.3 takes more resources to compile than
4.2 but should I be concerned about how much?
Memory usage is much higher in the COBOL V5/6.x versions than in any earlier
version. IBM tells you this explicitly in all its migration advice that I have
seen. In our shop we use the max locally allowed memory per programmer batch
job (IEFUTL00 limit) for every compile step, 640M.
IBM also explicitly warns about possibly significantly increased CPU usage, but
I think I remember they did say that was (mainly) for the advanced
optimization. If you are using OPT(0) that shouldn't add to CPU vs V4.2.
Are your CICS compiles using the CICS co-processor in the compile step or the
CICS pre-processor utility? Ours still use the preprocessor for both CICS and
for DB2 and for combinations of CICS and DB2. It's possible that would make a
difference if you are currently using the co-processor.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 4:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: I knew Cobol 6.3 takes more resources to compile than 4.2 but should I
be concerned about how much?
Hi list,
Should I be concerned about the amount of resources Cobol 6.3 is occasionally
using as compared to 4.2? I have one particular example that was brought to
our attention due to the fact that we ran out of page space in our small shop.
I finally got it to compile after tripling my page space. It is a CICS program
and is only 11270 lines long. I am compiling with Expediter, but have
optimization(0) configured so there is no additional compile-time processing
being done to optimize the load module. I removed Expediter and still had the
issues. Here are my comparisons. Has anybody else seen this kind of huge
increase?
Cobol42 without Expediter TCB .00499 minutes wall clock 2 seconds paging 0
serv 14956
Cobol42 with Expediter TCB .0138 minutes wall clock 2 seconds paging 0
serv 39158
Cobol63 without Expediter TCB 8.665 minutes wall clock 31 minutes paging
3185K serv 23,371,699
Cobol63 with Expediter TCB 8.519 minutes wall clock 23 minutes paging 4522K
serv 22,980,890
I will be opening a ticket with IBM but was wondering if anybody else has seen
this kind of spike. I have only seen this on one program and I have had my
developers compile hundreds of programs. I've seen CPU and wall clock time
increases but nothing like this. Obviously wall clock time is so variable due
to other tasks running, I just included it to show the drastic increase. 2
seconds to 23-31 minutes is insane.
Thanks,
Rex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
