Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM wrote:

>What is in fact the problem with this job, that the SORTWK specification 
>should be changed from JCL to dynamic?

>It seems, that you try to provide the much varying workspace, where in fact, 
>the job should be able to get its space anyhow.

>What is the problem with specifying the historical 90% space consumption and 
>allow for 50 or 100% growth, in JCL?
>When needed, you must have the largest amount of space available, so why not 
>make it available to every run of the job? It is only temporary, 
>seconds/minutes/qtrs/hours, not permanent.

Ok, time for me to jump in (despite just now posted the note about a PMR):

Your questions are good questions!

Perhaps the OP should also put in the "estimate" on how big the input for all 
the sorting work is in other terms.

Something like this: Have REGION=<really large> and OPTION 
DYNSPC=512,SIZE=E999999999,MAINSIZE=MAX (which is working for my hungry sort 
jobs.)

This will help DFSORT to try to allocate enough pool of work datasets to play 
with.

This is what I mostly do, I specify really large SORTWKnn and/or really large 
dynamic sort space. YMMV.

Of course, you should check your SMS setup so you have lots of free space.

If you still can't resolve your sort, try splitting up your sort input and/or 
just do a subselection.

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to