Morris cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Date: 04/12/2013 15:57
Subject:Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's
vs. internal (COBOL) SORT's?
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
On 2 Dec 2013 06:14:42 -0800
On 2 Dec 2013 06:14:42 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
Sorry about the late reply.
The last time I seriously looked, the COBOL sort verb invoked the installation
sort (DFsort, SYNCSORT,).
The COBOL program effectively became the E15/E35 sort exits.
On that basis, I would not
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Staller, Allan
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 9:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs. internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
Sorry about the late reply.
The last time I
Sorry about the late reply.
The last time I seriously looked, the COBOL sort verb invoked the installation
sort (DFsort, SYNCSORT,).
The COBOL program effectively became the E15/E35 sort exits.
On that basis, I would not expect any significant difference in CPU time
consumed, *AND* as
I was delighted to learn---authoritatively from Chris Blaicher---that
SYNCSORT no longer makes routine use of BSAM or QSAM to read/write its
sortin/sortout datasets.
His point that there are no generic, one-size-fits-all solutions is
also important.
It conceded, my own experience nevertheless
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Blaicher, Christopher Y.
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:10 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
John,
SyncSort has for many years not used any regular access methods in the normal
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of John Gilmore
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs
internal (COBOL) SORT's?
Note that the highly efficient i/o operations
It has been suggested to management here that there could be potentially
significant CPU savings from re-engineering application programs such that any
SORT's are done in a separate step, so that a program with a single internal
SORT would be broken up into a pre-SORT process followed by an
Message-
From: Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com
To: IBM-MAIN IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Mon, Nov 25, 2013 7:43 am
Subject: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
It has been suggested to management here that there could be potentially
The scheme you are considering is---if I understand it---that of
read prepin==|preprocess|==write sortin
read sortin==|external sort|==write sortout
read sortout==|postprocess|==write postout
It involves six i/o operations per record, and it thus has little to
recommend it.
If instead you use
-Original Message-
From: Alan Field alan_c_fi...@bluecrossmn.com
To: IBM-MAIN IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Mon, Nov 25, 2013 8:49 am
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
Peter,
Review/research the COBOL compiler FASTSRT option
.
Alan Field
Technical Engineer Principal
BCBS Minnesota
Phone: 651.662.3546 Mobile: 651.428.8826
From: Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU,
Date: 11/25/2013 09:43
Subject:Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
In
985915eee6984740ae93f8495c624c6c231f711...@jscpcwexmaa1
, November 25, 2013 11:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
Peter,
Review/research the COBOL compiler FASTSRT option. If you are using it
what you suggest will possibly make things worse.
If you aren't using
Of John McKown
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
facetiously
Perhaps they should also look at removing all embedded SQL call into a
pre-step to unload the required data
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
The scheme you are considering is---if I understand it---that of
read prepin==|preprocess|==write sortin
read sortin==|external
, 2013 11:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL) SORT's?
The scheme you are considering is---if I understand it---that of
read prepin==|preprocess|==write sortin
read sortin==|external sort|==write sortout
read sortout
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's
vs internal (COBOL) SORT's?
In
985915eee6984740ae93f8495c624c6c231f711...@jscpcwexmaa1.bsg.ad.adp.co
m,
on 11/25/2013
at 10:43 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com
said:
It has been
Thanks for the thoughts, Ed. Appreciated.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Ed Gould
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 3:46 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external
...@syncsort.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of John Gilmore
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Has anyone measured CPU savings using external SORT's vs internal
(COBOL
20 matches
Mail list logo
