Very cool on the DISPLAY INDEX-NAME!  This old dog has still been uttering
foul words under my breath whenever I had to display an INDEX
value...thanks.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Berkowitz [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 1:12 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: COBOL
>
> Shawn Gordon writes
>
>
> There is a very small difference, I did some performance tests years
> ago, but I got in the habit of using the INDEXED BY because of some of
> the convenient features of it, however some of the problems are that you
> can't display the index so there are situations where it is bothersome.
>
> On Thursday, November 1, 2001, at 10:55 AM, Shahan, Ray wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Does anyone know if there is any performance diff gained by using
> > INDEXED BY
> > over using a separate field as an index while accessing very large
> > arrays?
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Couple of things.  First you can display the index.  This enhancement was
> added in 5.5 along with secondary entry points, call by plabel, etc.  In
> fact I think Shawn actually commented on these in an Interact article.
>
> Secondly, for real performance on a large array, assuming it is already
> filled and is just being searched, try using the "SEARCH ALL" format of
> SEARCH.  This binary search will seriously speed up searches.  A table of
> 5000 entries that is binary searched will only have to check at most 13
> entries before it has a hit.
>
> Mike Berkowitz
> Guess? Inc.
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *