On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 02:10:24PM -0400, Richard Troth wrote: > > ECKD (today) is an IBM hardware solution for a software problem. > Originally, CKD exposed not only counts and keys (thus the acronym) > but more significantly tracks and records. NO ONE but MVS (and TPF) > has a firm requirement for that. What I mean is that CP and VSE can > at least tolerate a lack of tracks and records. (They can run from > IPL to shutdown on things like SAN.) More significantly, CMS, Linux, > and Solaris (or UTS or AIX or USS) explicitly THROW AWAY the track > and record semantics that our precious storage subsystems worked so > hard to present on the channel. They can't use it! They just care > about the data on the disk, not its geometry.
Are you implying VSE VSAM KSDS files do not utilize CKD architecture and/or there is no net performance advantage to that in this day and age? Maybe I need to look at the effort to migrate to 3370... -- May the LORD God bless you exceedingly abundantly! Dave Craig - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "'So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe.'" --from _Nightfall_ by Asimov/Silverberg
