Bill,
FWIW I think that jes2 sysout is limited to 255 (or around that number).
Ed
On Mar 4, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Bill Woodger wrote:
Well, the original LRECL is 304. Let's say every record is 300
bytes. Fills up the block, writes it. No room on the track for the
next block. Next block will be on a different track. Wasteful.
I mention it because these days it seems that many people (short on
experience) think "I've got a lot of data, what's the maximum
record-size I can use", so they reach for a manual, discover, and
happily "design" their file to have 32000+byte records.
Yes, I have no clue if "waste" occurs on the underlying physical
media, but that's not the point. Or is it? I don't know.
I'd like to know if it doesn't matter, as then I can stop raising
it every time I see it. Or can I? When I get to thinking of VSAM,
things go Klunk! again. Or do they...?
On Friday, 4 March 2016 14:56:31 UTC, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 04:58:45 -0600, Bill Woodger wrote:
Wouldn't that be a little wasteful? One block per track.
On Friday, 4 March 2016 10:48:40 UTC, Steve Coalbran wrote:
ALLOC with VB LRECL=32756 ?
;-)
It depends on how clever QSAM is at using the balance of a block
which
can contain several short records. The worst case is one record per
track.
It has been discussed here that Binder will write short blocks in
order
to fill a track; QSAM generally will not.
-- gil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
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
