Hi list,
I got a resolution for this compile-time issue yesterday and installed it on my
sandbox this morning. PTF UI81630 (the July accum maintenance) has the fix in
it. After installing the fix, the 3 INITCHECK options perform in essentially
the same amount of resources. TCB time for the INITCHECK(LAX) as well as
STRICT dropped by 90%, back to the roughly 54 CPU seconds.
Thank you, IBM Cobol team for sticking with it and fixing the issue.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 11:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] I knew Cobol 6.3 takes more resources to compile than
4.2 but should I be concerned about how much?
Hi list,
I have an update on this issue. I opened a ticket with IBM and I'm thinking
they are thinking there may be an issue with the compiler because they're still
looking at it to see if the CPU time can be improved. As I said earlier, we
have multiple programs and at this point only 1 of them is behaving this bad.
Going from .3 TCB seconds under Cobol 4.2 to 520 TCB seconds under 6.3 seems
more than a bit excessive.
IBM came back to me with a response stating that the INITCHECK compiler option
is the culprit. We have this option set at INITCHECK(LAX) across the board and
it normally doesn't cause heartburn - except in this one program. I compiled
the program with NOINITCHECK and the TCB time dropped by almost 90%, from 520
seconds to 54. Paging disappeared as storage requirements dropped by close to
95%.
Thank you to IBM for finding the problem as well as continuing to look to see
if there is in fact a problem with the compiler. Thank you also to the
IBM-Main soldiers who are willing to lend a hand when this type of weird thing
crops up.
More to come.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 3:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] I knew Cobol 6.3 takes more resources to compile than 4.2
but should I be concerned about how much?
Hi list,
Should I be concerned about the amount of resources Cobol 6.3 is occasionally
using as compared to 4.2? I have one particular example that was brought to
our attention due to the fact that we ran out of page space in our small shop.
I finally got it to compile after tripling my page space. It is a CICS program
and is only 11270 lines long. I am compiling with Expediter, but have
optimization(0) configured so there is no additional compile-time processing
being done to optimize the load module. I removed Expediter and still had the
issues. Here are my comparisons. Has anybody else seen this kind of huge
increase?
Cobol42 without Expediter TCB .00499 minuteswall clock 2 seconds paging 0
serv 14956
Cobol42 with Expediter TCB .0138 minutes wall clock 2 seconds paging 0
serv 39158
Cobol63 without Expediter TCB 8.665 minutes wall clock 31 minutes paging
3185K serv 23,371,699
Cobol63 with Expediter TCB 8.519 minutes wall clock 23 minutes paging 4522K
serv 22,980,890
I will be opening a ticket with IBM but was wondering if anybody else has seen
this kind of spike. I have only seen this on one program and I have had my
developers compile hundreds of programs. I've seen CPU and wall clock time
increases but nothing like this. Obviously wall clock time is so variable due
to other tasks running, I just included it to show the drastic increase. 2
seconds to 23-31 minutes is insane.
Thanks,
Rex
--
The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from
disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it,
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard
copy format. Thank you.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
--
The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from
disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on