John Eells wrote: > I hope the formatting will survive (we'll see).
It did! [ lots of interesting things snipped ] > Unless you're really into pain, I suggest *not* asking her to give you the > numbers. They'll give you a headache. Really. For once I will listen to you!!! [ more snippage ] > These contain the executable code, funny-looking machine language stuff. Hey! My assembler programs are not funny even when they're bug free... > I tested one data set in 1999, for DFSORT, and found a 20% reduction in space > utilization when the library was blocked at 32760 vs. 6144. 20% is > significant. Interesting. Thanks. Hmmm, 6144, wasn't that used a lot for SAS work files? >This takes 14ms on native 3390 DASD. This is 1,673 Dog Years to a computer. I'm doggone mad! Why or how did you came to that dog years? [ more snippage! My scissors are not that sharp anymore! ;-D ] > So larger block sizes still mean better performance. That is a relief! Here I agree with you! John, Many thanks for your very good and educational post! I really appreciate it very much! Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
