We also resolved large allocations requests from DB2 as well as TMM tape requests which can get fairly high by filtering those datasets and assigning them a special dataclass as David suggested.
As a sidebar, does anyone use anything higher than a mod 9 volume to allow for these higher allocation or large dataset requests? Regards, Gil. On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:20:06 -0400, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You could also direct his file via the ACS routines to a Data Class with the following: > > CDS Name . . . . . : ACTIVE > Data Class Name . . : VSCOMP > > Data Set Name Type . . . . . : EXTENDED > If Extended . . . . . . . . : REQUIRED > Extended Addressability . . : YES > Record Access Bias . . . . : USER > Space Constraint Relief . . . : YES > Reduce Space Up To (%) . . : 50 > Dynamic Volume Count . . . : 9 > Compaction . . . . . . . . . : YES > >This should be done with adequate testing. Extended addressing can provide up to 50% savings in space allocation and works for both Sequential and VSAM. >And if 1000 compacted cyls aren't enough, you now have a volume count of 9. > >Caveat: Make sure only normal APIs are used to access the data. > >________________________________ On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 06:31:10 -0700, willie bunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Good Day To All, > > My question is regarding the allocation of space on a given storage group which has 218 volumes. The job failed, due to a "IGD17279I 218 VOLUMES WERE REJECTED BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT SPACE (041A041D)" > > To resolve the problem I added 2 disks (3390-9) as a quick fix. I asked the user to correct the jcl so as to ask for a smaller primary and a larger secondary. He refuses to do so because in his opinion "the system will search for a volume that has that much free space in four "chunks" or less. If you ask for less space in the PRIMARY allocation, the system may choose a volume that has that much free space, but not enough to overflow into the SECONDARY allocation, if needed." I was not aware of the fact that the system allocates the space in chunks. Could anybody confirm this? Also, in the case of the allocation being done in 4 chunks, does the system allocate the dsn on the same volume or on other voumes within that particular storage group? > > In the case of not heeding my recommendation to reduce the primary allocation would there be another alternative that I could suggest besides putting the dsn to tape? > > Below is the user's code for the output dsn: > > //OUTERR DD DSN=DE01.DE0PS$02.XDS1.EXPAND.ERR(+1), > DISP=(,CATLG,DELETE), > SPACE=(CYL,(2000,250),RLSE), > DCB=(MODELDCB,RECFM=FB,LRECL=14126) > > Thanks for your comments and suggestions in advance. > > > __________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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
