The original question in this thread was:
"Has anyone implemented COBOL 5.1 to the point that you have measured the 
"promised" performance improvements in application code over the same code 
compiled with earlier COBOL compilers?"

We have compiled a few of our programs that run as part of some "utility" jobs 
that run daily and modified the JCL to run both the COBOL 5.1 version and the 
COBOL 4.2 version.   Mostly what these jobs do is read some input file, select 
certain records or fields and create a new data set with what was selected.  
So, none of them have a real large Procedure Division.

The output below is from a "Food Lion" SMF report (file 19 on the CBT) - it's 
formatted in my email, I hope that doesn't get lost.   The first entry for each 
program on the listing  the COBOL 5.1 run - in the case of COBSAM81 program, 
the first one was compiled OPT(2) and the second OPT(1) (and we run on a 
z10/BC, so we compiled ARCH(8)).

Mostly, the 5.1 programs show improvement in CPU time and in below the line 
region.  The elapsed time does not always improve, and sometimes gets worse, 
but not significantly worse.

                                   COBOL COMPARE JOBS RUN
 PROGRAM   CPU TIME  ELAPSED    TOTAL     SERVICE   REGION  REGION
  NAME   MMMM:SS.TH   TIME       I/O       UNITS    BELOW   ABOVE
COBSAM61    0:00.33 000:00:03     10,759        7K     .3M   14.4M
COBSAM61    0:00.33 000:00:04     10,720        7K     .6M   13.5M
COBSAM81    0:23.46 000:03:09  1,093,331      591K     .3M   17.5M
COBSAM81    0:23.12 000:02:39  1,093,329      586K     .3M   17.5M
COBSAM81    0:23.52 000:03:04  1,093,277      577K     .6M   16.5M
MAKEEX      0:03.95 000:00:57    104,410       83K     .3M   14.4M
MAKEEX      0:08.11 000:01:01    104,342      162K     .4M   13.6M
SS090       0:02.97 000:01:02     97,874       64K     .3M   14.1M
SS090       0:03.03 000:00:43     97,790       64K     .3M   13.4M
SS092       0:12.87 000:01:34    110,679      265K     .4M   14.9M
SS092       0:12.67 000:01:01    110,584      246K     .3M   13.7M
SS604       0:04.18 000:00:50    104,250       88K     .3M   14.1M
SS604       0:05.00 000:00:46    105,714      101K     .3M   13.3M

So, this is not "application" code, but it is what we have measured so far.

HTH,
Greg Shirey
Ben E. Keith Company


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to