Guy wrote:
 
>2) Since Image logging is tied to user logging, and since
>user logging has been around since dirt was invented, are
>we all paying a performance hit for buried CM code?
 
No, WRITELOG had been converted to NM with "new" locking
and buffering scheme since release 3.0 or 3.1. The
performance hit for Image logging should be minimum.
 
One enhancement did fall through the crack.  It was designed
to have a trusted routine without parameter checking and probing,
that WRITELOG intrinsic truns around calling after those checks.
The idea is to have Image logging calling the trusted interface
instead to save hundreds of instructions per call.  Unfortunately
the Image logging changes were either never submitted or had been
rolled back accidently.  It is not there today and no one remembered
why.
 
Depending on the record size and if DBXBEGIN is involved, this could
speedup image logging by another 5%.  The changes are minimum, just
switch calls.  Why do I care?  It was my idea ......
 
Paul Wang                          phone: (408) 988-7378
SolutionSoft Systems, Inc.         fax  : (408) 988-4777
                                   email: [log in to unmask]