ISPF Tables are great but not ideal for the volume that you are planning. If you decide to use ISPF Tables then be sure to create them in anything other than REXX which is extremely slow due to an inefficient design in this area. Table serves will work but your performance may not be what you really want to have. VSAM would definitely be a better option for you if that is something that will work for you.
Lionel B. Dyck <sdg>< Website: http://www.lbdsoftware.com "Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John Wooden -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Billy Ashton Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 8:19 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Max Size of ISPF table? Hello, I am working with an application team, and they are creating an ISPF application. One of the options is to use an ISPF table for the data in one component, but they will have between 50,000 and 80,000 rows in the table. What are your experiences with large ISPF tables, and is a table of 80,000 rows acceptable or practical? Another option is to write the ISPF application in COBOL and use VSAM or a database (although having only a single table in the database doesn't sound like the best course of action, either.) Data is loaded on a monthly basis (maybe 500-700 records) and otherwise this is a read-only ISPF application. Thanks for your thoughts. Billy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
