HP3000-L Archives

March 1997, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Park <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Mon, 17 Mar 1997 19:10:18 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Adding the 60,001st entry took the 500 CPU seconds.  We loaded the
first 60,000 duplicates in a batch job, with FCOPY, so I don't know
where it started slowing down.

----------
> From: Mark Landin <[log in to unmask]>
> >
> >We were recently doing some testing of a KSAM/CM file with over
60,000
> >duplicate keys, and thought of KSAM/xl as a possible solution to
the
> >poor performance we were seeing. Adding a new duplicate key to
KSAM/CM
> >was taking about 40 CPU seconds, but KSAM/xl took over 500 CPU
> >seconds!
>
> Are you saying it took 500 CPU seconds to add all 60,000 keys, to
add each key,
> or to add the 60,000th key? If the last, how long did it take to add
the
> 30,000th key? or the 5,000th key? At what point did the XL
performance become
> WORSE than the CM performance?
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2