> > As long as you have to use a 3390 track image with > ECKD mapping, the smaller tracksize will cost you > capacity on the image. Probably only the RVA will see > equivalent savings on the backend. Other devices do a > one to one mapping of the full ECKD image. > So, why not format the tracks with 1 full track block (rounded to next lower 512-byte boundary) and have the driver logically divide the track up into whatever 512-byte multiple blocks the user wants?
(I'm probably being stoopid here...) Leland
