Skip to main content

[archive] Sluggish Runtime

  • May 1, 2008
  • 2 replies
  • 0 views
D

[Migrated content. Thread originally posted on 30 April 2008]

I have a question about the 8.0 runtime. We are having issues with sluggish and slow response times. Our customers are complaining because they have upgraded from the 7.02 runtime because of Vista and now the programs are running slower. One example is that our Inventory Inquiry program under 7.02 loads immediately. Under 8.0, it takes 10 seconds to completely open the window and display the screen.

We have the runtime installed on the server and are accessing it through mapped drives. But, we installed it locally and had the same result.

We are not using thin clients.

We are not using AcuServer. Due to expense and some of our customers are really small, we are not using it. But, still... there is a big difference in the amount of time taken to open a window and display a screen between the two runtimes.

The PC's are Vista.

One other oddity. We took the one Inventory Inquiry program and changed all of the open from open INPUT to open I-O and it did speed up considerably. This is not ideal because of record locking issues, we don't want to leave our program this way ... it was just an idea after watching the program run the debugger and seeing that it seemed to hang on opening the files.

Has anyone else experienced any slowdown or sluggishness after upgrading to runtime 8.0?

TIA,
Rebekah

    2 replies

    D

    [Migrated content. Thread originally posted on 30 April 2008]

    I have a question about the 8.0 runtime. We are having issues with sluggish and slow response times. Our customers are complaining because they have upgraded from the 7.02 runtime because of Vista and now the programs are running slower. One example is that our Inventory Inquiry program under 7.02 loads immediately. Under 8.0, it takes 10 seconds to completely open the window and display the screen.

    We have the runtime installed on the server and are accessing it through mapped drives. But, we installed it locally and had the same result.

    We are not using thin clients.

    We are not using AcuServer. Due to expense and some of our customers are really small, we are not using it. But, still... there is a big difference in the amount of time taken to open a window and display a screen between the two runtimes.

    The PC's are Vista.

    One other oddity. We took the one Inventory Inquiry program and changed all of the open from open INPUT to open I-O and it did speed up considerably. This is not ideal because of record locking issues, we don't want to leave our program this way ... it was just an idea after watching the program run the debugger and seeing that it seemed to hang on opening the files.

    Has anyone else experienced any slowdown or sluggishness after upgrading to runtime 8.0?

    TIA,
    Rebekah
    Before we started using thin client we were doing all our work internally via the method of a mapped drive.
    Even way back then the performance was poor.

    Only thing I would suggest is that if you're application calls sub programs you try to avoid cancelling them on exit and set flags to stop it opening the files next call.
    We did this and performance was substancially increased.

    We've been through V6, V7 and in the past 3 months or so upgraded our customer to V8.0
    We do use thin client though and would not go down the route of a mapped drive.
    Our sites range from 5 users to to 75.
    Open's do seem very expensive in performance terms.

    Shaun
    D

    [Migrated content. Thread originally posted on 30 April 2008]

    I have a question about the 8.0 runtime. We are having issues with sluggish and slow response times. Our customers are complaining because they have upgraded from the 7.02 runtime because of Vista and now the programs are running slower. One example is that our Inventory Inquiry program under 7.02 loads immediately. Under 8.0, it takes 10 seconds to completely open the window and display the screen.

    We have the runtime installed on the server and are accessing it through mapped drives. But, we installed it locally and had the same result.

    We are not using thin clients.

    We are not using AcuServer. Due to expense and some of our customers are really small, we are not using it. But, still... there is a big difference in the amount of time taken to open a window and display a screen between the two runtimes.

    The PC's are Vista.

    One other oddity. We took the one Inventory Inquiry program and changed all of the open from open INPUT to open I-O and it did speed up considerably. This is not ideal because of record locking issues, we don't want to leave our program this way ... it was just an idea after watching the program run the debugger and seeing that it seemed to hang on opening the files.

    Has anyone else experienced any slowdown or sluggishness after upgrading to runtime 8.0?

    TIA,
    Rebekah
    First, add this entry to the Runtime configuration file:
    NT_OPP_LOCK_STATUS FAST

    This will cause the Runtime to use a faster method for opening files. For more on the subject see this KB article:
    http://supportline.microfocus.com/mf_kb_display.asp?kbnumber=25085

    You could also turn off Windows Opportunistic locking as described in this KB article:
    http://supportline.microfocus.com/mf_kb_display.asp?kbnumber=25084

    If that doesn't clear it up then run the application with the Profiler turned on. See the AcuCOBOL-GT User's Guide, Section 3.7 for details. Just run to display the first window then exit. The report will tell you what paragraphs consumed the most time. Then examine those paragraphs for clues.

    Another thing to do is to run with a trace file and these entries in your Runtime config file:
    PARAGRAPH_TRACE ON
    FILE_TRACE 9
    FILE_TRACE_TIMESTAMP ON

    If you can't identify anything in the trace that gives a clue where the slowdown is then raise a Technical Support Incident describing the steps you've taken and provide the trace file and profiler report.

    Recent badge winners

    Explore all badges
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement