:>: Well, it depends on the point of view. :>: Datasets "by definition" are for keeping data, not to make GRS ENQ, not
Everything depends on the point of view! Roger -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of retired mainframer Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 5:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Space Allocation In Bytes :>: -----Original Message----- :>: From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On :>: Behalf Of R.S. :>: Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 10:17 AM :>: To: [email protected] :>: Subject: Re: Space Allocation In Bytes :>: :>: W dniu 2012-08-28 17:59, Roger W. Suhr pisze: :>: > No, it's not illogical. We use Format 1 DSCB entries as model DSCB :>: for :>: > GDG's and other things. No data space use is needed for that, so we :>: > allocate TRK=0. No problem there! :>: :>: Well, it depends on the point of view. :>: Datasets "by definition" are for keeping data, not to make GRS ENQ, not :>: to be DSCB model (BTW: haven't heard anyone about SMS? DATACLASS or even :>: LIKE?). Zero-space dataset is like PDS with zero directory. Possible to :>: create, but not usable as intended. Do you extend this narrow definition of intention to include a PDS where all the data is kept in the directory and the members are all empty? This technique has probably been around as long as model DSCBs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
