David,
 
I checked the SYS1.PARMLIB.  In the example they are using (see below) 2048
 
DEFINE CLUSTER (NAME(?UID.MCDS) VOLUMES(?MCDSVOL) -  
     CYLINDERS(?CDSSIZE) FILE(HSMMCDS) -             
     STORCLAS(?SCCDSNM) -                            
     MGMTCLAS(?MCDFHSM) -                            
     RECORDSIZE(435 2040) FREESPACE(0 0) -           
     INDEXED KEYS(44 0) SHAREOPTIONS(3 3) -          
     SPEED BUFFERSPACE(530432) -                     
     UNIQUE NOWRITECHECK) -                          
     DATA(NAME(?UID.MCDS.DATA) -                     
     CONTROLINTERVALSIZE(12288)) -                   
     INDEX(NAME(?UID.MCDS.INDEX) -                   
     CONTROLINTERVALSIZE(2048))                      


--- On Wed, 5/6/09, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[email protected]> 
wrote:


From: O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: DEFINE CLUSTER MYSTERY
To: [email protected]
Received: Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 1:15 AM


How about IBM's opinion? The folks who wrote the code should know the best CI 
sizes.
Refer to SYS1.SAMPLIB(ARCSTRST)
Then do a find for NAME(?UID.MCDS)
You'll see that IBM uses a Data CI of 12K

If your management is allowing auditors to dictate VSAM parameters then you 
have my sympathy.

Dave O'Brien
NIH Contractor
________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] On Behalf Of esmie 
moo [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 9:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: DEFINE CLUSTER MYSTERY

Our auditors don't want to make changes if it "ain't broke".  I tried 
explaining the situation but I am receiving static.  Thanks for the advice.  
Maybe, they will accept another person's opinion.

Many thanks.

--- On Wed, 5/6/09, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[email protected]> 
wrote:


From: O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: DEFINE CLUSTER MYSTERY
To: [email protected]
Received: Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 12:56 AM


NO, but why would you want to use a 4K Data CI?

Dave O'Brien
NIH Contractor
________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] On Behalf Of esmie 
moo [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:54 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: DEFINE CLUSTER MYSTERY

David,

Thanks for the advice.  If I use the value which VSAM substitutes would there 
be a problem with DFHSM?

--- On Wed, 5/6/09, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[email protected]> 
wrote:


From: O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: DEFINE CLUSTER MYSTERY
To: [email protected]
Received: Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 12:29 AM


Try 18K for your Data CI.
The Index CI contains pointers to each Data CI. Using a 4K Data CI will produce 
180 Data CI per CA.
A 2k Index CI is not large enough therefore VSAM corrects your error.

Dave O'Brien
NIH Contractor
________________________________________



      __________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to