On 2016-09-06 12:39, Richard Pinion wrote: > I was surprised when it happened to me. I made > the mistake of assuming it would work as other > programs do, COBOL programs and non-OMVS utilities. > > However, when I went to the manual it explicitly stated that > was the way it worked. So you're probably right. > RFE? FTP ought to behave as much as possible like QSAM processing the same input. Principle of least astonishment. And a good example of how extensive documentation is not an alternative preferable to a quality product.
Hmmm... Tape convention? Two consecutive tape marks? No excuse. Likewise, FTP seems to ignore overriding attributes in a DD statement and lets the F1 DSCB dominate. I wonder what it does with a concatenation of Classic and UNIX files. > And TRSMAIN will be quite happy to explode an > incomplete input data set, giving a zero RC. > SR? I'd call this a data integrity failure. But perhaps the TERSE format was specified with insufficient attention to redundancy and error detection. > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Pinion > Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 10:57 AM > > And one thing to be aware of when using concatenated data sets as input to > z/OS FTP. If the first or an intervening data set is empty (assuming a valid > EOF has been written to the empty data set) and the following data sets are > not empty, EOF is signaled without processing the following non-empty data > sats. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
