Excellent! Sounds like almost all the pathlength was in REXX statements, not external programs.
Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Cloud & Systems Performance, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/ or https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2 From: Jean Bernard <jean.bern...@ca-assurances.fr> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 19/09/2017 14:22 Subject: Re: REXX performance Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> Many thanks for the replies, who gave us some ideas. We tried the time function and see that input file was heavy manipulated. i compiled the program and see a reduction of 88% in CPU with exact same output result ! so here the Rexx compiler do the job. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
