I might have missed it, but did the original poster show the actual call statements for PGMA and PGMB? Even if the programs, main and subprograms, were compiled with NODYNAM, if the call statements are CALL PGMA-VARIBLE and CALL PGMB-VARIABLE, where those two variables contain the subprogram names, that would be a dynamic call.
"Confidentially doc, I am the wabbit." Bugs Bunny Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Thursday, May 22nd, 2025 at 10:56 AM, Ralph Spadafora <ralphspadaf...@banknet.com> wrote: > LE modules IGZ@SCH4 and IGZXMCPY appear to be involved, consuming 7.73% and > 2.61% CPU. > > The attribution offsets (from the APA C08 report) that you included in your > original post are significant: > "002548 Attribution Offset 9.24" - the offset of the CALL statement to PGMA > "00248C Attribution Offset 0.11" - the offset of the CALL statement to PGMB > > By expanding these lines (for the offsets) in the APA C08 report, the system > (LE) modules that are in the call path will be displayed including their CPU > %. Comparing the call path for PGMA and PGMB should provide some clues. I > would expect to see IGZ@SCH4 and IGZXMCPY in the call path - no idea what > they do, but someone else on the list might know. > > Ralph. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
