On Mon, 14 Sep 2015, at 17:01, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 07:54:32 -0700, Lizette Koehler wrote: > > >Could you explain what problem you are trying to solve with this technique? > > > >How does it help your process to know which concatenated dataset the data > >came from? Why can you not use multiple DD Statements instead? > > > It might be simpler as the OP wishes. It's possible that records in some > input data sets, > identifiable by data set name, require a variation in processing, The > technique > Massimo wishes for spares him the need to know how many such data sets > exist > or in what order they appear.
If there's a way to define a file with one record - same lrecl, blksize etc as the other files, but a line of data that can't exist in any real data file - ie a marker record then how about //FILE1 DD DISP=SHR,DSN=MYDSN1 // DD DISP=SHR,DSN=MARKER // DD DISP=SHR,DSN=MYDSN2 // DD DISP=SHR,DSN=MARKER // DD DISP=SHR,DSN=MYDSN3 // DD DISP=SHR,DSN=MARKER etc. One could have more than one type of marker file - eg one that precedes weekend data and one that precedes weekday data etc. -- Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
