Peter Relson wrote: >>I agree the reference materials _imply_ that WAIT/POST are deprecated >>and that Pause/Release/Transfer should be used when possible. >If you have a concrete reference, please provide it. WAIT/POST is in no >way deprecated.
I wouldn't call it "deprecated", but this does suggest that the "transfer" feature of pause elements avoids dispatching overhead and therefore *MIGHT* be faster: https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieaa800/pausrel.htm "The Transfer service can both release a paused task or SRB and pass control directly to the released task or SRB. The Transfer service can also pause the task or SRB that calls the service. Thus, Transfer enables quick dispatches, saving the overhead of work search. It also allows two dispatchable units to trade control back and forth with minimal overhead." That's actually the main reason I ran my test; I wanted to see if this really made a difference (in the context of my admittedly unrealistic, TCB-only test). That's why there are 4 test scenarios: wait/post, pause/release, transfer, and transfer/pause. (And, as I've mentioned in another response, there should be a 5th: wait/post WITHOUT the "fast post" trick.) -- Jerry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
