I believe it's WAD or feature. But why next, I would think random would be best in spreading out the pain. And, if you don't do a lot of mounts, or you hit a lull, then you're always using the low order UCB's.
Thomas Conley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> 05/23/2007 02:15 PM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> To [email protected] cc Subject SELTAPE algorithm in z/OS I know SELTAPE was internalized eons ago, but I thought it was internalized as NEXT. I'm seeing what looks like RANDOM on z/OS V1R8. Is this a bug or a feature? My concern is that NEXT always seemed to be the best algorithm to spread out the pain and minimize certain drives getting hammered. Regards, Tom Conley ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
