Same result, same return code - yes. Customer found that one release of our product got an 878 when a prior release had not. I was experimenting to see if I could drive the 878 by finding the point (REGION=xxxx) at which the 878 first occurs in the two releases of our product (to see if it was just "normal" additional memory needs or something more sinister). As it turned out, I got this other behavior (wild CPU consumption) in the course of experimentation.
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Allan Kielstra Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 2:27 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: REGION=0M leads to CPU through the roof I want to be clear on one thing....The program produces the same result and has the same return code in both cases? Possibly another way of asking the same thing is: why did you alter the region size in the first place? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
