On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:00:48 -0500, Tim Hare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
n Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:00:48 -0500, Tim Hare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >We need to TERSE a fairly large (for us) amount of data. This data is in >multiple separate datasets now, but needs to be sent as one large sequential >dataset. We can TERSE the concatenated sequential input of course; but out >of curiosity I'm wondering: can you TERSE the individual components, >concatenate the results via IEBGENER, and the UNTERSE the resulting file on >the other end? On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:23:44 -0500, John McKown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I would probably do the following: > >1. TERSE each dataset to be transmitted. > >2. Create a PDS large enough to contain each TERSEd dataset as a separate >member. > PDS? If this a large amount of data (the OP didn't give a clue as to what that really meant...) then it's not going to fit within the small (relatively) size restriction of a PDS ( <64K tracks). Why not terse them (concatenated) and the output can be on a single tape data set (multi-volume if required) if the size is too big for disk. I've done that to deal with 15 volume 3390-3 SADUMP data sets. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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
