RE: OPM called by program running in a named activation group -- RPG400-L

Subject: RE: OPM called by program running in a named activation group
From: J.Beckeringh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:50:52 +0100
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Well, each user 1 blink, probably.

What I mean is that these days systems have become so powerful, that many
of yesterdays performance considerations have become irrelevant. What IBM
said about ACTGRP(*NEW) was that the overhead it took was not as big as,
but in the same league as starting a new job, i.e. signing on. How long
does signing off en on again take on your system?

Joep

rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 26-03-2009 14:38:52:

RE: OPM called by program running in a named activation group

David FOXWELL

Joep,

If you had 100 users, wouldn't it take more like 100 blinks?

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.