Greg Dyck wrote: > No one every said that Pause/Release was faster or consumed the same > amount of CPU as WAIT/POST, or that they should be used as a universal > replacement for WAIT/POST. They should be used where they provide value.
The reason I wrote the test is that the documentation is unclear as to performance, and suggests that TRANSFER, in particular, might be faster than WAIT/POST. From the 2.2 Assembler Services Guide: ======================= If you have, for example, an application that requires two or more tasks to trade control back and forth, these services provide efficient transfers of control. [...] The Transfer service can both release a paused task and pass control directly to the released task. The Transfer service can also pause the task that calls the service. Thus, Transfer enables quick dispatches, saving the overhead of work search. It also allows two tasks to trade control back and forth with minimal overhead. ======================= Aside from earlier comments here in IBM-MAIN, I had no particular preconceptions regarding the performance, which is why I wrote the tests. Both services are easy to use, so there was no compelling advantage to either on that score. -- Jerry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
