I would STRONGLY consider reducing the number of buffers and take the chance that the performance is perhaps less than ideal rather than watch the job ABEND.
ABENDs are not considered better performance. On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 14:43:56 -0600, Hal Merritt wrote: >Reducing block sizes can be *very* costly in performance. Same for >buffers. Don't do that. > >Technically, it is very easy to change a few compile options and >recompile. And that is the better choice by far. > >HTH and good luck. > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of JONES, CHARLIE > >Compiler: PP 5655-G53 IBM Enterprise COBOL for z/OS and OS/390 3.2.0 > >We have a LARGE COBOL application program that is exhausting below the >line storage and >abending. There are 16 QSAM files and an IDMS Database. -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
