Re: Dynamically allocated tables and %DEALLOC

[vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Aaron

I agree - and the main issue for performance for me is when the (service) program is called a lot, so that the startup cost is paid for every call of thousands or millions.

Yeah, fighting something odd can best be solved with simple means.

Vern

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Aaron Bartell" <aaronbartell@xxxxxxxxx> 

> But how expensive is it *really*? I am wondering if it is one of those 
> things where hardware has progressed to the point where it isn't as 
> noticeable anymore. Note I am not saying don't program for efficiencies, 
> but I do think about programmer debugging cryptic issues vs. taking certain 
> defaults to gard ones self. 
>
> Has somebody done some performance tests on this so we have more concrete 
> data? 
>
> Aaron Bartell 
> http://mowyourlawn.com 
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 7:13 AM, wrote: 
>
> > Paul 
> >
> > Using *NEW adds its own set of problems - mostly in performance - because 
> > it is relatively expensive to start a new AG. It IS an easier way to manage 
> > things, sometimes, but it is probably better to be sure you deallocate all 
> > memory yourself that you have allocated. 
> >
> > HTH 
> > Vern 
> -- 
> This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list 
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, 
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l 
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives 
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.