"Tom Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 18:16:40 -0300, Clark Morris wrote: > > > >>Just a question out of sheer curiosity: what do you mean by "GDG type > >>naming capabilities?" Are you talking about being able to have date/time > >>as part of the generation name or some such? > > > >There is no equivalent of PROD.FILE(+1) for an ESDS. The current > >implementation of changing (+1) to GnnnnVnn could be replaced by a > >different naming convention that accomplishes the same thing > >Gnnnnnnn.Vnnnnnn and more sophistication in specification of relative > >generation numbers. I just don't want to have to change JCL data set > >names for each instance of an ESDS. > > If you want IBM to take your ESDS-GDG requirement seriously, you might want > to beef up that business case a wee bit. > > "I just don't want to" doesn't have a whole lot of weight (unless, perhaps, > you are Warren Buffet or Bill Gates).
Not likely to happen. VSAM files have totally different format in the catalog than GDS records. The incompatibilities would make it extremely difficult to handle GDS files. Also, there would be problems in a user creating a ESDS, then a non-VSAM, etc, and attempting to read them using relative generation numbers. Generic VSAM files have other problems, such as associations - AIXes and PATH names, and the truenames for those AIX and PATh records would cause problems when the base VSAM rolled off the GDG. VSAM files with associations would rapidly fill up the GDG base record, causing other problems by using extension records which are a performance impact. And there are expectations of GDS's being non-VSAM - that's the way they were designed 40 years ago and changing that now could disrupt all kinds of vendor, user-written utilities, and other programs. If you want to use GDS's, then export the file to a GDS and when you want to use it, IMPORT it back into a VSAM file. Simple solution. > >><snip> > >>The failure to allow ESDS on tape and provide GDG type naming > >>capabilities also is a sore point with me. > >></snip> > > Tapes are becoming largely obsolete - why waste any time on that support > now? I strongly disagree. Tapes are not even close to obsolete - however, putting VSAM files on tape is an anachronism. See previous suggestion about export/import. Sorry it's a sore point with Clark, but I guess it will always be a sore point. Thanks, Mark Thomen Catalog/IDCAMS/VSAM Development ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
