Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 14:30:54 -0400
Reply-To: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From: Phil Rack <philrack@CSI.COM>
Organization: DeskTop Solutions
Subject: Re: run time difference, mapping drive vs. naming volume
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On Wednesday, May 12, 1999 11:29 AM, UPOLEW1 [SMTP:UPOLEW1@WESTAT.COM]
> I'm running SAS 6.12 on Windows 95.
> I've tried setting up LIBNAMEs and FILENAMEs two ways:
> First, I mapped a drive on my PC to a network directory, and then used
> in my LIBNAMEs and FILENAMEs. For example, I mapped L: to
> then set up LIBNAMES like this:
> libname data1 "l:\datafile";
> libname programs "l:\programs";
> Second, I specified the actual volume names in the LIBNAMEs and
> libname data1 "\\server1\vol3\projectx\datafile";
> libname programs "\\server1\vol3\projectx\programs";
> I'm finding that using the second method always causes my programs to
> longer to
> run, sometimes a lot longer. The minimum difference I've seen is about
> which means
> that the programs take almost twice as long to run, but I've seen
> close to six
> times as long for an entire program, and some of the individual steps
> times as
> long to run. It seems to vary based on the traffic on the network--the
> traffic, the bigger
> the difference between the two methods.
> Does anyone have an idea why this might be happening? I'd like to be
> use the second
> method so that anyone can run the programs, regardless of the drive
> their computers,
> but the time difference is a problem.
> Wanda Upole
> Trilogy Consulting
I tried your experiment and the same thing happened on our server (NT 4.0)
as well. I did notice that the number of transaction per second are much
higher using the dns method as opposed to mapping the drive to a drive
letter. I've not checked the perfmon program on the server, but perhaps
that would give you some idea of what's going on.