No, I had not. Thanks, I will try.
Kris Buelens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
il.com> To
Sent by: The IBM IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
z/VM Operating cc
System
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
ARK.EDU> Re: Rexx performance question
01/12/2007 10:23
AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM
Operating System
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ARK.EDU>
Have you tried this too?
PIPE LITERAL VAR1 VAR2 VAR3 ...| SPLIT |VARFETCH 1 DIRECT TOLOAD|VARLOAD
DIRECT
Note: the "DIRECT" tells not to try to resolve compound symbols, this also
means one must pass the variable names in uppercase (and stem suffixes in
the exact case).
--
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support
2007/1/12, Peter Rothman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
We have an old REXX exec that I had to modify.
This is a rather simplistic description but it consists of 2 parts - 1 to
set up the environment(variables) and 2 to use the variables setup in 1.
Bottom I had problems modifying it so I re-wrote it.
The original used GLOBALV extensively - part 1 would do PUTs and part 2
would do GETs.
Besides a lot of 'steam lining' I thought I would be 'clever' and changed
the GLOBALVs to 'PIPE var VarName 1 | var VarName'.
However the new exec ran much slower than the old.
I then did a test to only compare GLOBALV PUT/GET to setting and
retrieving
the variable with PIPE var stage.
The pipe stage was much slower.
I thought the pipe logic would be better - obviously mistaken.
Any comments - any other method I could have used that is perhaps faster
than GLOBALV?
Thanks
Peter
