|
> From: <David.X.Kahn@gsk.com>
> Nathan wrote:
>
> >> Why not use a CHAIN?
> >
> > You took the first thought that came to my mind and put it into
> > words <smile>. Or, why not use SETLL for better performance?
>
> Because it's a fallacy. :-)
>
> Dave...
I wrote the following program to test CHAIN vs. SETLL. It did surprise me
that CHAIN took only 13% more time. That's not much difference. Thank you
for pointing out the not-so-obvious.
Ftestio IF E K DISK
D myKey S 12A Dim(10000)
D i S 10I 0
D Now S Z
D Then S Z
D Secs S 10I 0
*-----------------------------------------------------------------
C For i = 1 to 10000
C Read testior
C Eval myKey(i) = tikey
C EndFor
*-----------------------------------------------------------------
C Time Then
C For i = 1 to 10000
C myKey(i) Setll testio 70
C EndFor
*-----------------------------------------------------------------
C Time Now
C Now Subdur Then Secs:*MS
C Secs Dsply
*-----------------------------------------------------------------
C Time Then
C For i = 1 to 10000
C myKey(i) Chain testior 70
C EndFor
*-----------------------------------------------------------------
C Time Now
C Now Subdur Then Secs:*MS
C Secs Dsply
*-----------------------------------------------------------------
C SetOn LR
C Return
Nathan M. Andelin
www.relational-data.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.