As of (IIRC) z/OS 1.12 there is a user enabled dfsms function CA_RECLAIM that 
allows the use of orphaned CA's w/o need for a "offline" reorg.
Applies to VSAM KSDS. Not to Linear VSAM

HTH

<quote>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeremy Nicoll
>Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 1:28 AM
>
>I dunno about the first bit, but "routine mainframe defrag" is fine.
>DFDSS has a DEFRAG verb.
>
I used to believe that DB2 might require a REPRO to reclaim orphaned CA/CIs.  
Is that still the case?
</quote>

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 2:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: How many ways can one sentence be wrong dept

On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 13:59:21 -0500, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

>Out of curiosity, its been a while since I did storage admin but it occurred 
>to me that for the most part a lot of the work in defragging, worrying about 
>disk geometry and other issues are really not / less of an issue with cache 
>and SSD technologies.  So, perhaps naive on my part, but it would seem to me 
>the work to “defrag” is really more to keep up the legacy z/OS concepts like # 
>of extents, CKD processing for PDS’, etc.  Are there benefits to defragging 
>these days apart from the consequences of the limitations from older 
>architectures and paradigms like directory blocks and member placement?
>
Alas, while the new technologies bypass the performance impact of 
fragmentation, insofar as they faithfully emulate older hardware it's still 
possible to have virtual space exhaustion.  Aren't PDSes still limited to 
65,535 virtual tracks?  PDSEs are better at reclaiming space.

I could imagine a Super-IEBCOPY's updating directory blocks and DS1LSTAR and 
reclaiming space so virtually freed.  Only imagine.

Even as SSD firmware moves and remaps physical blocks to counteract fatigue.

>-----Original Message-----
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 09:32:01 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:

>When you compress a PDS aren't you essentially de-fragging it? No, not
>the way the word is used on PC disks, but you are essentially
>consolidating fragments of free space into one big chunk of free space.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeremy Nicoll
>Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 1:28 AM
>
>I dunno about the first bit, but "routine mainframe defrag" is fine.
>DFDSS has a DEFRAG verb.
>
I used to believe that DB2 might require a REPRO to reclaim orphaned CA/CIs.  
Is that still the case?

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
[email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
::DISCLAIMER::
________________________________
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.
________________________________

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to