In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/18/2006
at 10:12 AM, Rick Fochtman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Since we're talking about DASD space, shouldn't those factors be
>1000, as opposed to 1024 ??
I'd certainly find GB more natural that GiB for sizing DASD, but
they're a lot closer to each other than either is to MiB ;-)
Also, I'm not sure how useful a calculator that assumes full track
would be; I'd expect it to seriously overestimate the capacity for
realistic block sizes. Pesonally I'd just use the old routine from the
CBT tape (BLK3390?).
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
