On Jan 16, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Rick Fochtman wrote:
-------------------<snip>---------------
I have not done a merge in *YEARS*, having said that I believe
(even if you concatenate) each concatenation has to be in a
"higher" sequence than the file ahead of the concatenation (all
records still must be in the right sequence) so (if) you can
concatenate the records must be in sequence. I hope I said that
right and Walt can correct if I am wrong.
ie sortin01 dd (seq01-09) example for illustrative purposes only
dd (seq10-15) " "
dd (seq16-??) " "
----------------<unsnip>-----------------
Not true, Ed. a MERGE will merge, and interleave where necessary,
based on the parameters provided in the control statements. I
believe that the only requirements are that the various input files
be in sequence by the same keys before starting, and that the input
files be of the same format vis-a-vis LRECL and RECFM.
Rick:
I have been offline much of the afternoon due to an email problem
that was magically fixed.
Frank indicated that you cannot concatenate sortinxx I personally
don't see why not as long as the sequence is "OK" (and any other
restrictions like LRECL etc) but if DFSORT doesn't allow it fine with
me. I was just hazarding a guess anyway. I have leaned something
anyway. Like I said in my original entry I hadn't done a MERGE in
years and I guess it shows. Now if he would have said "NO" to sortin
(in a sort) I would have raised a vigorous objection. Merge is one of
those only use it when the sort is too big (for me) .
Anyway Thanks to Frank for correcting me.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
