It would seem to me that that you are correct in that Pipes would make the code a lot nicer - but I would assume the overhead has to be greater. So what is it buying in this instance?
I'll look at the EXECIO and see what I can find. David Wakser -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Hayden Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:47 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: VM Read problem It would go on your EXECIO command - that is the one getting the output from CP. I don't know if this is really your problem or not, since I didn't try to make sense of your code, but it is a "gotcha" anyway. The reason I mention CMS Pipelines is because it will automatically reissue a CP query command when the buffer fills up and use a large enough buffer. The best way to use Pipelines is to redesign your exec and put the logic in your Do loop into the pipeline. But, a small first step would be to replace the EXECIO command with "PIPE CP Q RDR * ALL | stack" the next improvement is to drop the header in the pipe: "PIPE CP Q RDR * ALL | drop 1 | stack" and so forth until you've eliminated the loop and done all the work in the pipe.. On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Wakser, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bruce: > > RECEIVE has no BUFFER option - so I am confused as to what you > mean. > > David Wakser > > -----Original Message----- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Bruce Hayden > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 1:15 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: VM Read problem > > Well, 100 reader files at about 80 chars per line plus the header, is > 8080 bytes, just short of the default 8192 default buffer for > returning the output from a CP command. Maybe you need to specify a > bigger buffer using the BUFFER option? And, of course, CMS Pipelines > would be a much better solution... > -- Bruce Hayden Linux on System z Advanced Technical Support IBM, Endicott, NY
