In a recent note, McKown, John said:
> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 07:55:47 -0600
>
> I agree that updating BPAM to fully support a UNIX subdirectory in
> read/write mode would be the best thing since sliced bread. However, not
> being privy to the internals of BPAM, I cannot comment on how
> easy/difficult this would be to accomplish. And SMP/E has a proven need,
> today, for a very large SMPPTS environment. So it might be easier to get
> a business case for updating SMP/E than DFSMS.
> <observation type="tacky">
> Given some of the back-and-forth here about DFSMS, it sometimes appears
> that the DFSMS people have an agenda which is not always comprehensible
> to us on the outside.
> </observation>
>
Still pondering. When the SMPPTS is fragmented over spill data sets,
what sort of metacompress is there to consolidate distributed free
space?
I searched for the quotation and found an attribution to Gordon Bell:
"The fatal mistake computer architects make is having too
few address bits."
Central storage addressing has advanced from 24 to 31 to 64 bits.
Over the same interval, the TTR and the (BB)CCHHR have remained
fixed; bursting at the seams (and there shouldn't be seams, as
in spill data sets). Evolve or die.
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
