Educate me why 32k with wasted space on a track is better than half track; I do defer to your knowledge and do not argue you are not right, but why?
Barry -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Eells Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 10:34 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Extents more than One for load modules library Barry Merrill wrote: > If the loadlib has a very small blocksiZe (e.g. 1000 bytes, which we found in > an IMS load library) that causes a frequently loaded module to be in MANY > extents, there can be response time impact of seconds per transaction when > those multi-extent members are loaded. Using half-track blocksize will > mitigate against that kind of stupidity we found in our IMS folks who had > chosen that small blocksize "to make more use of disk space" (which was > itself an incorrect choice). It is often better to use 32,760 for load libraries than to use any smaller block size, and it's never worse. -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
