Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-18 Thread Art Gutowski
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:29:34 +, Mingee, David david.min...@libertymutual.com wrote: Yes, I think the number than causes the failure is cyl 4104? The math is too hard for me. 4369 Cylinders = 65535 Tracks Regards, Art Gutowski Compuware Corporation

Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Adams, Tracy
I have a dd statement that bombs when I try to allocate a 4000 cyl temp dataset saying it can't statisfy the allocation because I have exceeded the 65535 track limit. The perticular utility appears to be an internal sort and wont allocate any second extents. Any ideas? Thanks!

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Starr, Alan
DSNTYPE=LARGE -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Adams, Tracy Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:11 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks I have a dd statement that bombs when I try

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Mingee, David
than 65535 tracks I have a dd statement that bombs when I try to allocate a 4000 cyl temp dataset saying it can't statisfy the allocation because I have exceeded the 65535 track limit. The perticular utility appears to be an internal sort and wont allocate any second extents. Any ideas

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Adams, Tracy
Thanks!! That worked as designed. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Starr, Alan Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 12:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks DSNTYPE=LARGE -Original

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Schwarz, Barry A
greater than 65535 tracks I have a dd statement that bombs when I try to allocate a 4000 cyl temp dataset saying it can't statisfy the allocation because I have exceeded the 65535 track limit. The perticular utility appears to be an internal sort and wont allocate any second extents. Any

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Adams, Tracy
-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Schwarz, Barry A Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 2:28 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks I'm confused. Isn't 4,000 cylinders only 60,000 tracks which is less than 65,535 tracks. -Original Message- From: IBM

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Mingee, David
Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Schwarz, Barry A Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 2:28 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks I'm confused. Isn't 4,000 cylinders only 60,000 tracks which is less than 65,535 tracks. -Original

Re: Allocations greater than 65535 tracks

2011-07-15 Thread Rick Fochtman
-snip- Correct on the math... my allocation I believe was around 4500, I was just lax coming up with the true number to make my point. The government could you use you now more than ever to get their numbers