Back in TSS/360 everything was VPAM. I don't see why IBM couldn't have done the same thing with MVS. NIH?
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Clark Morris <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2018 9:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: PDSE, an opportunity trashed was Re: PDSE in LNKLST (Was: Re: IGW01203E MEMBER xxxxxxxx EXCEEDS...) [Default] On 13 Nov 2018 15:24:57 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main [email protected] (Ed Jaffe) wrote: >On 11/13/2018 2:51 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >> This point was discussed recently. The restriction as stated applies to LPA >> list. Link list has a number of IBM-supplied PDSE libraries specified in >> PROGxx. That the restriction applies to LPA list, SYS1.NUCLEUS and SYS1.PARMLIB testifies to management short-sightednes. Putting code into IPLTEXT and SYS1.NUCLEUS to read PDSEs should not have been that difficult. If IBM had carried forth the vision in original VSAM which included sequential data sets, FBA devices could have been used only for FBA formatted data (VSAM, PDSE, Unix files, etc.) with CKD files being migrated at the installation priority. Instead, countless machine cycles and DASD bytes are wasted fitting FBA files poorly to CKD architecture with in turn fits poorly on to the actual supporting CKD devices. Clark Morris > >> rest snipped ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
