Understood, but the 3350 hasn't been available for over 30 years, and the 3390 format has been available for almost 30 years. I would think the "prevailing mentality" could have changed in those 30 years. Not worth quibbling about, but it just strikes me as odd that even with SDB available for - I don't know how long - but with 3390 format being the standard for almost 30 years, I'm still seeing things show up from vendors defaulting to 3120 or 6160 block sizes for FB/80 and around 4-6K for load library blocks. Inertia is a great force! LOL
Rex -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of salva Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2025 4:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Grrr! Yes, TSO TRANSMIT destroys PDSes (Rant) 6160 was the best fit for 3350 (97%) with small buffer size. El jue, 18 dic 2025, 22:45, Pommier, Rex < [email protected]> escribió: > One thing I've never understood. Why 6160 for a FB/80 sequential > dataset? > > A FB/6160 has 8 blk per track = 49200 bytes of 56664 = 86.9% > > But bumping it to FB/80/6480 yields > > 8 blocks per track, 51840 bytes per block, 91.5% utilization. > > Rex > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On > Behalf Of salva > Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2025 3:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Grrr! Yes, TSO TRANSMIT destroys PDSes (Rant) > > A FB 80/27920 has 2 blk per track = 55840 bytes of 56664 = 98.5% > > A FB/6160 has 8 blk per track = 49200 bytes of 56664 = 86.9% > > It is a important difference, but not huge. > > El jue, 18 dic 2025, 22:16, rpinion865 < > [email protected]> escribió: > > > Broken record here. But I see our QR libraries with the following > > DCB information FB 80/6160 non-loadlib datasets and U 0/6133 for > > load libraries. The libraries are not large, but still why not join > > at least the 1990s. > > > > > > > > "Confidentially doc, I am the wabbit." > > > > Bugs Bunny > > > > Sent with Proton Mail secure email. > > > > On Thursday, December 18th, 2025 at 3:59 PM, Mike Shaw < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 3:39 PM Jon Perryman [email protected] > wrote: > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > Sadly, XMIT is as old as TSO and very little has changed over > > > > the years because it's rarely used. > > > > > > Rarely used? > > > > > > I have the opposite view. I have seen it used by other ISVs many > > > times > > and > > > we use it as part of our product installation process and for > > > certain > > data > > > set backups. It works and it's simple to invoke. > > > > > > Mike Shaw > > > MVS/QuickRef Support Group > > > Chicago-Soft, Ltd. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- > > > -- 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 > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
