Re: System slow-down - disk usage?

[Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Crispin,

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  How's this: chain is faster only if the key
being searched for
doesn't exist AND the key _being_searched_for_ is greater than
anything else in the file.

According to the message from Barbara that you posted the ink to, this
is due to the fact that SETLL has to reposition to the EOF.  Whereas
chain doesn't.

Your message does make me wonder...what if the file pointer is already
at EOF.  Does SETLL still lose?  Maybe your test showed that it does?

In any event, the test where the records exist is as I expected.

Charles


On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Crispin Bates <cbates@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Charles Wilt" <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> > Crispin,
> >
> > Slight correction, chain is faster only if the key being searched for
> > doesn't exist AND the key is greater than anything else in the file.
> >
> > Otherwise SETLL is faster.
> >
> > Charles
>
> Charles,
>
> Forgive me for being dumb. Isn't what you said more likely to result in
> SETLL being faster?
>
> "If the key being searched for doesn't exist AND the key is greater than
> anything else in the file"
>
> Surely that would mean that SETLL would not have to reposition because it
> was already at end of file? Or am I completely missing what you are saying
> (quite likely)?
>
> But that is just anecdotal, as I don't know if SETLL still has to position
> to end of file even if there is no key higher.