On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:30:22 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote: >Wayne Rhoten discussed at SHARE in San Francisco improvements to PDSE (V1) such >that it now prefers lower-numbered RBNs to higher-numbered RBNs when looking >for >"free" blocks to store new member and directory data. This should make partial >release work much better for PDSE going forward.
Let's hope so. My 'nother basic SMS q was associated with this issue. A truckload of overallocated (active) PDSE for load modules. The responsible user attempted release (as they showed around half unused), later trying reallocation (using LIKE=) in a multivolume d/class. The results were underwhelming to say the least. Why after all these years are we only now getting solutions to (some of) the short-comings in PDSE ?. Shane ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
