On 12/22/2012 06:01 PM, Donald Likens wrote:
Thank you for all your replies... By these replies It sounds like I should be
concerned about using over a gig of vitual memory.
...
...unless of course you have enough real memory to back the table's
working set and the application is "most loved".
One thing you definitely don't want to do with 35K entries is anything
resembling a serial search, even through a much smaller table that only
contains the search argument and corresponding record address! If
record lookup has much higher frequency than record add, and if there
isn't already a simple relationship between your search argument and a
record ordinal, you might want to consider hashing table techniques to
map the search argument to the corresponding record address to greatly
reduce overhead of finding records.
--
Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR jcew...@acm.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
