Sorry, but I interpreted your comments about the expense of serialization as implying avoiding CDS.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> on behalf of Peter Relson <rel...@us.ibm.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2024 8:14 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: : Re: SETLOCK OBTAIN CML/CMS External Message: Use Caution Shmuel wrote <snip> Is CDS that expensive? I had assume that grabbing and emptying the queue would be extremely low overhead, absent insane arrival rates. </snip> It is not overly relevant if CDS or CS is expensive regardless of arrival rates because any other approach would be far slower. Not every use case can be covered with CDS(G) and/or CS(G) but, for those that can be, anyone with performance concerns would use them. The implementation would not be as simple as ENQ/DEQ but is not all that complex. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design
