I don't understand your comment. COPYMOD has always adjusted the size of text blocks to optimally fill the track, so in actual fact 32760 for load libraries will sell less DASD, not more.
I don't understand the issue. Load libraries have an undefined record format precisely because the majority of the records are significantly less than the block size. In fact, the only thing that would ever be blocked to the maximum value would be the TXT records for a module. Since a load module consists of other records besides TXT (which are all less than 256 bytes in length), the traditional concept of a block size is practically meaningless when applied to load libraries.
Single CSECT load modules are almost never large enough to use the maximum (32760) since that would require 8 base registers, so the only load modules that would produce TXT large enough to take advantage of the maximum block size are those that consist of multiple bound modules. Even then, the "benefit" would only come from a minimal savings on disk and a possible savings in fewer I/O's to load the module. Since both of these are extremely difficult to quantify in the case of load libraries, it becomes largely academic what values are chosen. IMHO I don't see a difference between 32760 and 6144, since the majority of the records are actually < 256 bytes.
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
