On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:43:07 -0600, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> wrote: <SNIP> >Your computation gives what deceptive vendors call "unformatted >space". It's easy to conjecture (though properly we should >ask) that the OP was interested in the size of the data, not >the unformatted disk space occupied by the data set. > >-- gil
And, as you earlier pointed out, if the OP wanted to know the actual number of bytes contained in the records in the dataset, then the only real way to determine that is to actually read it. However, the 56K / track might be considered a good "upper limit" if a person only need to know before hand if a dataset could be ftp'ed to a given server (assuming the user knew the space available on the server or if they had some sort of quota). Oh, and again, this assumes no compression product, such as SMS compression or BMC's Data Accelerator, has compressed the data in the dataset. -- John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
