Re: Another Question about variable length fields -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Another Question about variable length fields
From: "James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:10:29 -0800
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

John Allen wrote:

I then updated the file so that the new file with the new variable length
field has data truncated to minimum length (stripped off trailing blanks)

Just for grins, try a RGZPFM on it. The space you squeezed out of the records may still be inflating the heap size.

--
JHHL

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Another Question about variable length fields , Vern Hamberg

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.