Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 15:15:07 GMT
Reply-To: sashole@mediaone.net
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Paul Dorfman <paul_dorfman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: MVS -- U1319, No MKLES
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Puddin',
From your test, it appears that it is a V8 bug. Apparently, the transition
from V6 to V8 has rendered MINSTG inoperative - exactly where MINSTG would
be even more valuable since V8 consumes much more memory than V6 *at idle*.
Practically speaking, given the same amount of real storage OS/390 gives me
now (70M), many of my smoothly running programs will bomb with a loud crack.
I am going to report it to SI and insist that our system people keep V6
alive until at least V8.1 or V8.2, or until the bug has been fixed.
Thanks for your input.
Kind regards,
======================
Paul M. Dorfman
Jacksonville, Fl
======================
>From: Puddin' Man <pudding_man@ALTAVISTA.COM>
>Reply-To: Puddin' Man <pudding_man@ALTAVISTA.COM>
>To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>Subject: Fwd: Re: MVS -- U1319, No MKLES
>Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 06:47:19 -0700
>
>On Thu, 06 April 2000, "Paul M. Dorfman" wrote:
>
> >
> > Puddin',
> >
> > Right. But run a second step - after the first - allocating say 100,000
> > elements, and I bet you will see a lot of difference.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Paul
>
>Take a peek, see what you think:
>
> *------------------------------------------------------------------*
> *- SAS Version 8.00 Enhanced TS M0 -*
> *------------------------------------------------------------------*
> NOTE: SAS system options specified are:
> SORT=4 FULLSTATS MINSTG
>
> NOTE: The initialization phase used 0.08 CPU seconds and 6068K.
> 1 data _null_; array a(2000000) _temporary_; run;
>
> NOTE: The DATA statement used the following resources:
> Task memory - 4276K (74K data, 4202K program)
> Total memory - 22559K (17824K data, 4735K program)
>
> 2 data _null_; array a(100000) _temporary_; run;
>
> NOTE: The DATA statement used the following resources:
> Task memory - 4192K (74K data, 4118K program)
> Total memory - 22475K (17824K data, 4651K program)
>
> 3 data _null_; x=1 ; run;
>
> NOTE: The DATA statement used the following resources:
> Task memory - 4188K (70K data, 4118K program)
> Total memory - 22475K (17824K data, 4651K program)
>
>It appears that the data step grabs "17824K data" and holds
>on to it regardless of the needs of subsequent data steps. Eh?
>
>Here's a quick/dirty test with PROC's:
>
>5 data a;
>6 do i=1 to 250 by 4;
>7 do j=1 to 250 by 4;
>8 do k=1 to 250 by 4;
>9 x=normal(0);
>10 output;
>11 end;
>12 end;
>13 end;
>
>NOTE: The data set WORK.A has 250047 observations and 4 variables.
>NOTE: The DATA statement used the following resources:
> Task memory - 4272K (70K data, 4202K program)
> Total memory - 22583K (17824K data, 4759K program)
>
> 14 proc summary nway;
> 15 class i j k;
> 16 var x;
> 17 output out=b;
>
> NOTE: Processing on disk occurred during summarization.
>Peak disk usage was approximately 46 Mbytes. Adjusting SUMSIZE may
>improve
> performance.
> NOTE: There were 250047 observations read from the dataset WORK.A.
> NOTE: The data set WORK.B has 1250235 observations and 7 variables.
> NOTE: The PROCEDURE SUMMARY used the following resources:
> Task memory - -16805K (-20660K data, 3855K program)
> Total memory - 27997K (23328K data, 4669K program)
>
> 18 proc print data=b(obs=20);
> 3 The SAS Syst
>
> 19 ENDSAS;
> NOTE: There were 20 observations read from the dataset WORK.B.
> NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT printed page 1.
> NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT used the following resources:
> Task memory - 4333K (61K data, 4272K program)
> Total memory - 22856K (17824K data, 5032K program)
>
> NOTE: The SAS session used 10.35 CPU seconds and 28360K.
>
>Up to "23328K data" then back down to "17824K data". It
>doesn't seem to wanna "let loose" the data space
>used by the data step.
>
>But it seems to have released some memory used by
>PROC SUMMARY. Thats better than nothing ...
>
> Prosit,
> Puddin'
>
>"Gimme back my wig
> and, honey, let you head go bald!"
> - Hound Dog Taylor, maybe 1972
>
>
>
>*******************************************************
>* Arrest records (for the infamous Storeyville *
>* district of New Orleans) at the turn of the *
>* century list underworld characters with bizarre *
>* aliases like Drop o' Sack, Cinderella, Pudding Man, *
>* Willie the Pleaser, Diamond Dick, Lead Pencil, ... *
>*******************************************************
>*** Puddin' Man *** Pudding_Man@altavista.com *****
>*******************************************************
>;
>____________________________________________________________________
>
>For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>
>
>*****************************************************
>*** Puddin' Man *** pudding_man@altavista.com ***
>*****************************************************;
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>
>For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com
>
>____________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
| 
