Re: R14.1 vs. R16 ADS performance

Discussion created by ca.portal.admin on Mar 6, 2006
Chris -

The program was assembled with HLASM R4.0 using ASMA90.

Here are some actual numbers.
The numbers are percentage increases in CPU seconds comparing OLD VS.
I know these look scary, but remember I am comparing a 14.0 system with
16.0 - SP3 system.
This is quite a span of a few releases and many service packs.

Prod. Pgm #1 - 24.9% increase
Prod. Pgm #2 - 24.8% increase
Prod. Pgm #3 - 19.5% increase
Test COBOL pgm - 33.0% increase
Test Assm pgm - loop=5000 - 42.0% increase
Test Assm pgm - loop=10000 -45.7% increase
Test Assm pgm - loop=50000 -42.2% increase

The assembler program used for testing was assembled under 16.0 and the
load module was used in both 14.0 and 16.0 testing.

Several of the tests we ran and monitored with IBM's Application
It can actually break down code slices and individual instructions where
majority of the CPU time is being spent....even without source.
It uses a PSW sampling technique.
This is the information I've been furnishing to C.A.

It also shows Real Storage (Page Frames) by uniform time intervals.
I have observed that this is not constant during execution.
However, things like paging and swapping will cause this variability.
There is nothing in the program that would demand more or less stoarage.
It is basically a pure database navigational program.

Jon Gocher

----- Original Message -----
From: ""Chris Wood"" <Chris.Wood@GOV.AB.CA>
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: R14.1 vs. R16 ADS performance


What version of Assembler is your program assembled with? Did you have
to re-assemble it to run on 16.0?

Can you give some actual CPU stats for the runs please? I see that you
are adjusting the number of times you loop thru the program to further
expand the CPU differences. Is the ratio constant or does it go up and
how is the memory requirement for the jobs? Does this requirement go up
with the more loops and/or 14.0 to 16.0?