Ted MacNEIL wrote: >Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >>-- A data base application was redesigned at the last minute to read the >>entire data base into memory at startup. The business unit noticed that they >>were charged for I/O but not for memory use. It was cheaper to occupy virtual >>storage than to perform reads. So much for common sense.
>Your first example is not necessarily bad behavior. >I bet it performed! Good catch! (I overlooked that part...) I agree that usage of virtual storage is better for performance. That is if you have enough storage and you don't get paged out/in too much. Of course it depends on the size of that DB and what algorithm you're using to drop last referenced records. RACF is doing more or less the same (per profiles only, not the whole DB!). XCF makes that easier. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
