>One of my co-workers is trying to improve the performance of an Enterprise = >4.1 program that decomposes an input XML file into record fields for proces= >sing by later programs. The volume of the XML input has increased quite a = >bit and the performance may soon impact SLA's.
>This program is currently compiled with XMLPARSE(COMPAT), so I advised him = >to try compiling a test version with XMLPARSE(XMLSS) and run some production >data through both versions a few times to get some average performance >numbers. The COBOL Performance Tuning Paper could have helped you out here, it says: | Performance considerations for XML PARSE example: | Five programs using XML PARSE were from 20% to 108% slower when using | XMLPARSE(XMLSS) compared to using XMLPARSE(COMPAT). >The XMLSS version seems to be running about 10% more CPU utilization and el= >apsed time than the production version, on average. That's not bad! In my personal tests, I got about 100% more CPU usage with XMLSS compared to COMPAT. >Are there any tweaks or adjustments that can or should be made to the XMLSS= > subsystem to improve performance? Our environment is z/OS V1 R12, z196 ha= >rdware. No, switch back to COMPAT. The COMPAT parser is a minimum funcoitn parser, and is missin a lot of function considered important by XML folks, like NAMESPACE support, UTF-8 and UTF-16 support and many other features. If you do not need those features, then we recommend that you don't choose the overhead of the XMLSS parser. Also, offloading to specialty processors does not change total CPU usage, and does not improve performance or throughput. It could change how how much you pay to run it. 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
