SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
 Gibney, Dave
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 22:31
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
  -Original Message-
  From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
  Behalf Of Thomas Berg
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 5:11 AM
  To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
  Subject: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
   -Ursprungligt meddelande-
   Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
   Lizette Koehler
   Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 12:43
   Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
   Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
  
   
I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc) for an
   allocation of a
dataset.
You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You always (both
   principally and in
practice) want to allocate as much as is needed during execution
   
If for backward compatibility it can't be done automatically, why
 not
   introduce a new
keyword like e g SPACE=ANY ?
   
   
  
   Thomas,
  
   IIRC - if you force a DATACLAS on a dataset in SMS, you can specify
 the
   Space requirements there.  Then the JCL does not require Space.  Have
 you
   looked at that?  However, then that makes your storage admin
 responsible
   for
   ensuring the space is enough.  And if needed alter the dataclass if
 there
   are space issues.  And it would require all such datasets be SMS
 managed.
  
  
   Lizette
 
  Hi Lizette,
 
  In practice it's not a viable alternative. Besides the need (if doing it
 that way)
  to communicate frequently with the space gang, it's to many variants
 of
  datasetnames and to many different needs for space depending on time,
  date and subgrouping within applications.
 
 
 
   But, this is precisely what SMS and DATACLAS are for. It does
 accomplish, for the most part, SPACE=ANY.
 Not fully using SMS is so 80s'

If so, do You really see everyone that creates and submits JCLs to 
create/change DATACLAS/STORCLAS instead of editing the SPACE= parms ?
Or do You envision DATACLAS/STORCLAS's with very generous SPACE allocations 
(for every allocation) ?  


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote in message
news:2205241542597622.wa.paulgboulderaim@bama.ua.edu...
 On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:14 +0100, R.S. wrote:
 
 The only application I know that manages extent size - that means
using
 some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka Wbesphere MQ
 (since version 6 AFAIR).
 It would be nice to have such facility in DATACLASS.
  
 Nice indeed.  And someone else suggested DB2 as another good
 performer.
 
 And now I may add to my list another example or two of IBM's having
 a good idea but implementing it in the wrong layer.  This should have
 been done not in MQ and/or DB2, but in allocation where all
applications
 could take advantage of it.  All this could have been done without
 changing the specification of the VTOC and DSCB nor making
incompatible
 changes to them.
 
 Conway's Law.
 
 -- gil

There is no 'IBM', there is the z/OS lab, the MQ lab and the DB2 lab. If
the DB2 lab needs something or has a good idea and the z/OS lab is not
willing to implement it, the DB2 lab implements it itself (assuming they
at least talk to each other).

Kees.

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



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


SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
 Lizette Koehler
 Skickat: den 14 februari 2012 13:27
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
  
 But, this is precisely what SMS and DATACLAS are for. It does
   accomplish, for the most part, SPACE=ANY.
   Not fully using SMS is so 80s'
 
  If so, do You really see everyone that creates and submits JCLs to
 create/change
  DATACLAS/STORCLAS instead of editing the SPACE= parms ?
  Or do You envision DATACLAS/STORCLAS's with very generous SPACE
 allocations (for
  every allocation) ?
 
 
 
  Regards,
  Thomas Berg
 
 So the question becomes where to define space?  The system cannot think
 like a human.  It usually needs a place to start.  So IBM provided some
 solutions.

Please!  Requirement of space do not need any thinking.  It answers itself 
during the execution.  

 The LIKE parm in JCL

If You have and remember the appropriate dataset.  And this is not much better 
than using SPACE=.

 The SMS DataClas functions

Se my post above.

 The JCL SPACE parm 

Which caused my choice of subject: Archaic...

 I think it was amazing that IBM was able to eliminate the need for
 DCB=(x) and just let us use the subparms.
 
 For SPACE you are looking at old code that needs to be altered in
 CONVERTER,
 JES, ALLOCATION, IOS and probably more.  It is old code and not likely to
 change in our lifetimes.  

AFAICS, what needs to be changed is just the interpretation of the SPACE parm 
and 
the actual allocation on disk at the time of execution. 
- There have been changes in the JCL language the latest Years: LIKE, DCB 
subparms 
outside of the DCB parm, etc.  This could obviously be done.
- There can't be that many places that does the allocation of the space on 
disk. 
Note that there is no change of cataloging as such, just the process of 
adding/extending the 
extents as the dataset is expanding.  There is no need to change the old code 
more than 
allowing a branch to the new code to handle the case of the new variant of 
the SPACE parm.  

snip

 Wait - we are back
 to your issue.  Having to monitor and change something for space issues.
 That is where products like SRS and SRM are helpful.  They monitor your
 system and if a space issue is about to happen, dynamically change the
 data allocations on the fly.  Remember the old STOPX37?  But, you also have
 issues because now you need to monitor the monitors and adjust them as
 space issues arise.  

Here we are back to how we look at the space allocation process.  You seems to 
see it 
as a complicated process - or at least an intellectually demanding logic.
For me it's something I can do in my sleep.  (It's just a loop of changing the 
SPACE parms 
until it works = no B37 etc.)
How could this be other that a VSMOP ?

snip

 If you truly want to see this type of issue resolved, then perhaps a SHARE
 requirement or Change request to IBM would be more effective?

Well, with more effective You seem to assume that I'm trying to get something 
realized.  But this 
was/begun as an opinion from me to the ongoing discussions in this list 
regarding enhancements 
of MVS. 

For a realization of something like this and as working in a Swedish company 
(which AFAIK 
is not a SHARE member) I have to rely on other participants on this list that 
are SHARE members. 
(A request by me to IBM needs accompanying money...) 


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:28:58 +0100, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM wrote:

Paul Gilmartin  wrote in message

 And now I may add to my list another example or two of IBM's having
 a good idea but implementing it in the wrong layer.  This should have
 been done not in MQ and/or DB2, but in allocation where all
applications
 could take advantage of it.  All this could have been done without
 changing the specification of the VTOC and DSCB nor making
incompatible
 changes to them.

 Conway's Law.

There is no 'IBM', there is the z/OS lab, the MQ lab and the DB2 lab. If
the DB2 lab needs something or has a good idea and the z/OS lab is not
willing to implement it, the DB2 lab implements it itself (assuming they
at least talk to each other).
 
That's a close paraphrase of my surmise of Conway's Law.

-- gil

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Gerhard Postpischil

On 2/14/2012 9:42 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:

AFAICS, what needs to be changed is just the interpretation of the SPACE parm 
and
the actual allocation on disk at the time of execution.
-  There have been changes in the JCL language the latest Years: LIKE, DCB 
subparms
outside of the DCB parm, etc.  This could obviously be done.
-  There can't be that many places that does the allocation of the space on 
disk.
Note that there is no change of cataloging as such, just the process of 
adding/extending the
extents as the dataset is expanding.  There is no need to change the old code 
more than
allowing a branch to the new code to handle the case of the new variant of 
the SPACE parm.


You may think of your request as being reasonable, but a new 
SPACE parameter could be added in less time than this thread has 
been going. There is no one place where old code can be branched 
away from, rather space/extent processing is endemic in all DASD 
related code. More critically, most I/O related control blocks 
have physical limits, and would require major redesign to handle 
even static expansion, not to mention dynamic. By comparison, 
supporting FBA devices in zOS would have been trivial, but IBM 
could not justify that, either.


Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Ron Hawkins
Thomas,

I've done this with DFSMS for a large, multi-country application where the
developers simply coded UNIT=SMALL, MEDIUM, LARGE and HUGE in the JCL.

The ACS routines took this UNIT value, along with some other logic and
assigned a standard space allocation using the appropriate DATACLAS.

The size for each DATACLAS was different for the DEV, UNIT and PROD
environments, which allowed them to use the same JCL for these different
environments.

We did protect successful allocation with UNITCNT=5 and some ACC.

Ron


 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of
 Thomas Berg
 Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 5:11 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: [IBM-MAIN] SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record
size
 query)
 
  -Ursprungligt meddelande-
  Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
  Lizette Koehler
  Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 12:43
  Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
  Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
  
   I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc) for an
  allocation of a
   dataset.
   You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You always (both
  principally and in
   practice) want to allocate as much as is needed during execution
  
   If for backward compatibility it can't be done automatically, why
   not
  introduce a new
   keyword like e g SPACE=ANY ?
  
  
 
  Thomas,
 
  IIRC - if you force a DATACLAS on a dataset in SMS, you can specify
  the Space requirements there.  Then the JCL does not require Space.
  Have you looked at that?  However, then that makes your storage admin
  responsible for ensuring the space is enough.  And if needed alter the
  dataclass if there are space issues.  And it would require all such
  datasets be SMS managed.
 
 
  Lizette
 
 Hi Lizette,
 
 In practice it's not a viable alternative. Besides the need (if doing it
that
 way) to communicate frequently with the space gang, it's to many
variants of
 datasetnames and to many different needs for space depending on time, date
and
 subgrouping within applications.
 
 
 
 Regards,
 Thomas Berg
 _
 Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to
 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

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


SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
 Lizette Koehler
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 12:43
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 
  I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc) for an
 allocation of a
  dataset.
  You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You always (both
 principally and in
  practice) want to allocate as much as is needed during execution
 
  If for backward compatibility it can't be done automatically, why not
 introduce a new
  keyword like e g SPACE=ANY ?
 
 
 
 Thomas,
 
 IIRC - if you force a DATACLAS on a dataset in SMS, you can specify the
 Space requirements there.  Then the JCL does not require Space.  Have you
 looked at that?  However, then that makes your storage admin responsible
 for
 ensuring the space is enough.  And if needed alter the dataclass if there
 are space issues.  And it would require all such datasets be SMS managed.
 
 
 Lizette

Hi Lizette,

In practice it's not a viable alternative. Besides the need (if doing it that 
way) to communicate frequently with the space gang, it's to many variants of 
datasetnames and to many different needs for space depending on time, date and 
subgrouping within applications. 


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

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


SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
My variant is faster to write!  ;)

(BTW, with my idea only needed space is allocated, there is no unused 
preallocated space.)


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 


 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
 McKown, John
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 14:21
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 Or, as the programmers at our shop would do:
 
 SPACE=EAT-EVERYTHING-IN-SIGHT-AND-CAUSE-OTHER-JOBS-TO-ABEND-BECAUSE-MY-
 STUFF-IS-IMPORTANT-AND-YOUR-STUFF-ISNT.
 
 Or
 
 SPACE=WHAT,ME_WORRY?
 
 Or
 
 SPACE=I-CANT-BE-BOTHERED-TO-SIZE-THIS-PROPERLY-AND-MY-PROGRAMS-NEVER-LOOP-
 EXCESSIVELY
 
 In many other systems, such as Winblows, everybody gets their own personal
 space. And if it is used up, it doesn't impact others. z/OS shares
 DASD space. So one bad apple can cause a major problem. Hopefully not in
 production. But what about for temp space? I've had production jobs go
 down due to no space on the work packs due to a nitwit coding up a job
 with 30 SORTWKnn DD statements, with SPACE=(CYL,(2000,100)). Because they
 kept getting SORT CAPACITY EXCEEDED and just wanted the elided job to
 run. This was in internal COBOL sort, so dynamic SORTWORK was not
 possible. IIRC, the problem was their program outputting about 30 million
 records (a bug).
 
 --
 John McKown
 Systems Engineer IV
 IT
 
 Administrative Services Group
 
 HealthMarkets®
 
 9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010
 (817) 255-3225 phone .
 john.mck...@healthmarkets.com . www.HealthMarkets.com
 
 Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or
 proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
 contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
 message. HealthMarkets® is the brand name for products underwritten and
 issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The
 Chesapeake Life Insurance Company®, Mid-West National Life Insurance
 Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
 
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
  [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Thomas Berg
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 5:28 AM
  To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
  Subject: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
  I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc)
  for an allocation of a dataset.
  You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You
  always (both principally and in practice) want to allocate as
  much as is needed during execution
 
  If for backward compatibility it can't be done automatically,
  why not introduce a new keyword like e g SPACE=ANY ?
 
 
 
  Regards,
  Thomas Berg
  _
  Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK
 
  --
  For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
  send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 
 
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

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


SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
 Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 14:22
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se wrote in message
 news:a90e503c23f97441b05ee302853b0e6263ff850...@fspas01ev010.fspa.myntet.
 se...
   -Ursprungligt meddelande-
   Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
   Lizette Koehler
   Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 12:43
   Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
   Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
  
   
I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc) for an
   allocation of a
dataset.
You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You always (both
   principally and in
practice) want to allocate as much as is needed during execution
   
If for backward compatibility it can't be done automatically, why
 not
   introduce a new
keyword like e g SPACE=ANY ?
   
   
  
   Thomas,
  
   IIRC - if you force a DATACLAS on a dataset in SMS, you can specify
 the
   Space requirements there.  Then the JCL does not require Space.  Have
 you
   looked at that?  However, then that makes your storage admin
 responsible
   for
   ensuring the space is enough.  And if needed alter the dataclass if
 there
   are space issues.  And it would require all such datasets be SMS
 managed.
  
  
   Lizette
 
  Hi Lizette,
 
  In practice it's not a viable alternative. Besides the need (if doing it
 that way) to communicate frequently with the space gang, it's to many
 variants of datasetnames and to many different needs for space depending
 on time, date and subgrouping within applications.
 
 
 
  Regards,
  Thomas Berg
 
 Now I don't understand: if you have so many different space needs, how do
 you assume 'SPACE=ANY' to solve this?

With SPACE=ANY, the needed space is allocated and extended during the 
execution. 
So You don't do any preallocation of a specified amount of space. 


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread R.S.

W dniu 2012-02-13 14:28, Thomas Berg pisze:
[...]

With SPACE=ANY, the needed space is allocated and extended during the execution.
So You don't do any preallocation of a specified amount of space.


Thomas,
Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target.
It is not JCL problem, it is z/OS problem. To fill the requirement the 
sapce should be allocated ad hoc, cluster after cluster (*). That 
requires total VTOC revolution.


BTW: Idea of space extents is maybe archaic, but I wouldn't consider it 
worse. It's different and reruires different approach and tools.



(*) Cluster - in this case the smallest addressable amount of disk 
storage. For 3390-3 it would be 1 trk, for NTFS disk in my PC it would 
be 4kB, for old FAT format of 2GB partition it was 32kB, for EAS on EAV 
device it is 21 CYL.

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie 
jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by 
karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie 
zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo 
wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorised to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. 


BRE Bank SA, 00-950 Warszawa, ul. Senatorska 18, tel. +48 (22) 829 00 00, fax 
+48 (22) 829 00 33, www.brebank.pl, e-mail: i...@brebank.pl
Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2012 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci wpacony) wynosi 168.410.984 zotych.


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


SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
(This is an answer also to Vernooij.)

Please consider what You do manually when the space is to small (e g B37 etc.), 
or You just is unsure: You try a bigger allocation, maybe also extend (or 
reduce) the secondary amount. And repeat. Often many times. 
Would it be a problem if this (more or less) is automated ?  Hm ?

Technically I suppose it's solved by an initial virtual allocation filling a 
buffer in memory.
Then a disk allocation is done at a threshold with e g 5 cyl.
If that is not enough, add 4 times the amount, 20 cyl.
Repeat this until finish.  
Release unused space (from the last add). 

This is just an example, it can be done much more sophisticated by the OS. 

And the limit of allocation should be set by userid or datasetname properly.  
Or maybe by a (e g) LIMIT= keyword.

(I'm using the JCL case as an illustrative example, it should of course be 
general system interface.)


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För R.S.
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 14:49
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 W dniu 2012-02-13 14:28, Thomas Berg pisze:
 [...]
  With SPACE=ANY, the needed space is allocated and extended during the
 execution.
  So You don't do any preallocation of a specified amount of space.
 
 Thomas,
 Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target.
 It is not JCL problem, it is z/OS problem. To fill the requirement the
 sapce should be allocated ad hoc, cluster after cluster (*). That
 requires total VTOC revolution.
 
 BTW: Idea of space extents is maybe archaic, but I wouldn't consider it
 worse. It's different and reruires different approach and tools.
 
 
 (*) Cluster - in this case the smallest addressable amount of disk
 storage. For 3390-3 it would be 1 trk, for NTFS disk in my PC it would
 be 4kB, for old FAT format of 2GB partition it was 32kB, for EAS on EAV
 device it is 21 CYL.
 --
 Radoslaw Skorupka
 Lodz, Poland

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


Re: SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread R.S.

W dniu 2012-02-13 15:21, Thomas Berg pisze:

(This is an answer also to Vernooij.)

Please consider what You do manually when the space is to small (e g B37 etc.), 
or You just is unsure: You try a bigger allocation, maybe also extend (or 
reduce) the secondary amount. And repeat. Often many times.
Would it be a problem if this (more or less) is automated ?  Hm ?

Technically I suppose it's solved by an initial virtual allocation filling a 
buffer in memory.
Then a disk allocation is done at a threshold with e g 5 cyl.
If that is not enough, add 4 times the amount, 20 cyl.
Repeat this until finish.
Release unused space (from the last add).

This is just an example, it can be done much more sophisticated by the OS.

And the limit of allocation should be set by userid or datasetname properly.  
Or maybe by a (e g) LIMIT= keyword.

(I'm using the JCL case as an illustrative example, it should of course be 
general system interface.)



Actually space abends in my environment are very very rare. Time and 
experience were needed to go there, but the experience + SMS facilities 
+ DFSMShsm causes x37 abends almost non-existent.


As I said, z/OS storage requires different approach. On Windows system 
programmer opens the file and writes to it. On z/OS he has to answer the 
question: HOW MUCH DATA DO YOU EXPECT TO BE WRITTEN. The answer can be 
vry imprecise, but it is required.


Could it be better? I think so. What about unlimited number of extents? 
Or at least, let's say, 3000 per volume? What about multi-volume 
PDS(E)s? What about FBA disks?

WAKE UP!
;-)

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie 
jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by 
karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie 
zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo 
wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorised to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. 


BRE Bank SA, 00-950 Warszawa, ul. Senatorska 18, tel. +48 (22) 829 00 00, fax 
+48 (22) 829 00 33, www.brebank.pl, e-mail: i...@brebank.pl
Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2012 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci wpacony) wynosi 168.410.984 zotych.


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


SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För Paul
 Gilmartin
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 15:48
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:27:53 +0100, Thomas Berg wrote:
 
 I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc) for an
 allocation of a dataset.
 You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You always (both
 principally and in practice) want to allocate as much as is needed during
 execution
 
 Can you use UNIX files (zFS) for your purposes and avoid the archaism?
 

Not practically.  But that would be a circumvention, not a solution as I see 
it. 


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:48:57 +0100, R.S. wrote:

Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target.
It is not JCL problem, it is z/OS problem. To fill the requirement the
sapce should be allocated ad hoc, cluster after cluster (*). That
requires total VTOC revolution.
 
What I'd like to see as a less revolutioary implementation of
SPACE=ANY is:

o Primary allocation: one cluster.

o Succeeding allocations are successive Fibonacci numbers
  (arbitrary design choice) of clusters.

Since extents are not now constrained to be equal in size, this
would be a relatively local change in allocation.  Since (in some
cases) a data set may have up to 123 extents, this would
support a maximum data set size of up to 1.6 ^ 122 clusters,
hardly a practical limit.

-- gil

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


SV: SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För R.S.
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 15:49
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size
 query)
 
 W dniu 2012-02-13 15:21, Thomas Berg pisze:
  (This is an answer also to Vernooij.)
 
  Please consider what You do manually when the space is to small (e g B37
 etc.), or You just is unsure: You try a bigger allocation, maybe also
 extend (or reduce) the secondary amount. And repeat. Often many times.
  Would it be a problem if this (more or less) is automated ?  Hm ?
 
  Technically I suppose it's solved by an initial virtual allocation
 filling a buffer in memory.
  Then a disk allocation is done at a threshold with e g 5 cyl.
  If that is not enough, add 4 times the amount, 20 cyl.
  Repeat this until finish.
  Release unused space (from the last add).
 
  This is just an example, it can be done much more sophisticated by the
 OS.
 
  And the limit of allocation should be set by userid or datasetname
 properly.  Or maybe by a (e g) LIMIT= keyword.
 
  (I'm using the JCL case as an illustrative example, it should of course
 be general system interface.)
 
 
 Actually space abends in my environment are very very rare. Time and
 experience were needed to go there, but the experience + SMS facilities
 + DFSMShsm causes x37 abends almost non-existent.
 
 As I said, z/OS storage requires different approach. On Windows system
 programmer opens the file and writes to it. On z/OS he has to answer the
 question: HOW MUCH DATA DO YOU EXPECT TO BE WRITTEN. The answer can be
 vry imprecise, but it is required.
 
 Could it be better? I think so. What about unlimited number of extents?
 Or at least, let's say, 3000 per volume? What about multi-volume
 PDS(E)s? What about FBA disks?
 WAKE UP!
 ;-)

I refuse!  :)

(In my life space abends occurs regularly, often caused by circumstances beyond 
my control.)
BTW, You latter suggestions is not bad - but You didn't go far enough!  There 
should unlimited number of *everything*! Don't make artificial limits. 


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 



 

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread R.S.

W dniu 2012-02-13 16:14, Paul Gilmartin pisze:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:48:57 +0100, R.S. wrote:


Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target.
It is not JCL problem, it is z/OS problem. To fill the requirement the
sapce should be allocated ad hoc, cluster after cluster (*). That
requires total VTOC revolution.


What I'd like to see as a less revolutioary implementation of
SPACE=ANY is:

o Primary allocation: one cluster.

o Succeeding allocations are successive Fibonacci numbers
   (arbitrary design choice) of clusters.

Since extents are not now constrained to be equal in size, this
would be a relatively local change in allocation.  Since (in some
cases) a data set may have up to 123 extents, this would
support a maximum data set size of up to 1.6 ^ 122 clusters,
hardly a practical limit.


The only application I know that manages extent size - that means using 
some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka Wbesphere MQ 
(since version 6 AFAIR).

It would be nice to have such facility in DATACLASS.
However using DVC and 123 ext/vol and space constraint relief + reduce 
allocation is not bad also.




--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie 
jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by 
karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie 
zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo 
wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorised to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. 


BRE Bank SA, 00-950 Warszawa, ul. Senatorska 18, tel. +48 (22) 829 00 00, fax 
+48 (22) 829 00 33, www.brebank.pl, e-mail: i...@brebank.pl
Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2012 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci wpacony) wynosi 168.410.984 zotych.


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


Re: SV: SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Mark Jacobs

On 02/13/12 10:20, Thomas Berg wrote:
snip


I refuse!  :)

(In my life space abends occurs regularly, often caused by circumstances beyond 
my control.)
BTW, You latter suggestions is not bad - but You didn't go far enough!  There 
should unlimited number of *everything*! Don't make artificial limits.


  
Regards,

Thomas Berg
_
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK


   
TANSTAAFL. Whether we like it or not economics is a fact of life, 
everything can't be unlimited. There are always costs involved both for 
widgets and for the management of said widgets.


--
Mark Jacobs
Time Customer Service
Tampa, FL


Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow.
The important thing is to not stop questioning.

- Albert Einstein

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:13:48 +0100, Thomas Berg wrote:
 
 Can you use UNIX files (zFS) for your purposes and avoid the archaism?

Not practically.  But that would be a circumvention, not a solution as I see 
it.
 
When something doesn't work as desired, and it's impractical to fix it
(R.S. appears to understand the design constraints), and you discard
it and get a new one with more satisfactory design, I don't see why you
see that as a circumvention as opposed to a solution.

Suppose z/OS were to provide an entirely new DSORG that met your
requirement of SPACE=ANY.  Would you see that also as a
circumvention?

Tne customers' perennial but impossible demand: Make it work, but
don't change anything!  E.g.: allow volumes larger than 54 GB,
but don't change the 3390 geometry!

-- gil

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


Re: SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se wrote in message 
news:a90e503c23f97441b05ee302853b0e6263ff850...@fspas01ev010.fspa.myntet.se...
  -Ursprungligt meddelande-
  Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För R.S.
  Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 15:49
  Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
  Ämne: Re: SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size
  query)
  
  W dniu 2012-02-13 15:21, Thomas Berg pisze:
   (This is an answer also to Vernooij.)
  
   Please consider what You do manually when the space is to small (e g B37
  etc.), or You just is unsure: You try a bigger allocation, maybe also
  extend (or reduce) the secondary amount. And repeat. Often many times.
   Would it be a problem if this (more or less) is automated ?  Hm ?
  
   Technically I suppose it's solved by an initial virtual allocation
  filling a buffer in memory.
   Then a disk allocation is done at a threshold with e g 5 cyl.
   If that is not enough, add 4 times the amount, 20 cyl.
   Repeat this until finish.
   Release unused space (from the last add).
  
   This is just an example, it can be done much more sophisticated by the
  OS.
  
   And the limit of allocation should be set by userid or datasetname
  properly.  Or maybe by a (e g) LIMIT= keyword.
  
   (I'm using the JCL case as an illustrative example, it should of course
  be general system interface.)
  
  
  Actually space abends in my environment are very very rare. Time and
  experience were needed to go there, but the experience + SMS facilities
  + DFSMShsm causes x37 abends almost non-existent.
  
  As I said, z/OS storage requires different approach. On Windows system
  programmer opens the file and writes to it. On z/OS he has to answer the
  question: HOW MUCH DATA DO YOU EXPECT TO BE WRITTEN. The answer can be
  vry imprecise, but it is required.
  
  Could it be better? I think so. What about unlimited number of extents?
  Or at least, let's say, 3000 per volume? What about multi-volume
  PDS(E)s? What about FBA disks?
  WAKE UP!
  ;-)
 
 I refuse!  :)
 
 (In my life space abends occurs regularly, often caused by circumstances 
 beyond my control.)
 BTW, You latter suggestions is not bad - but You didn't go far enough!  There 
 should unlimited number of *everything*! Don't make artificial limits. 
 
 
  
 Regards, 
 Thomas Berg 

This is a huge conversion.

There was a good point in your previous suggestion and in Gill's: take a 
primary allocation and add ever larger secondaries. With multivolume datasets, 
you can have a lot of extents and consequently a lot of space, all without 
having to change the current limits in the Dasd architecture. 

It only requires a new Space Constraint Releave algorithme.

This is what DB2 does nowadays. Our DB2 administrators converted to this 
(-1,-1) allocation a year ago and happily saw problems with mis/underallocated 
space amounts disappear completely and we gained back a lot of unnecessarily 
overallocated space from the former way of database space allocation. The knife 
cuts on both sides this way.

Kees.

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



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


SV: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För Paul
 Gilmartin
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 16:30
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:13:48 +0100, Thomas Berg wrote:
  
  Can you use UNIX files (zFS) for your purposes and avoid the archaism?
 
 Not practically.  But that would be a circumvention, not a solution as I
 see it.
 
 When something doesn't work as desired, and it's impractical to fix it
 (R.S. appears to understand the design constraints), and you discard
 it and get a new one with more satisfactory design, I don't see why you
 see that as a circumvention as opposed to a solution.
 
 Suppose z/OS were to provide an entirely new DSORG that met your
 requirement of SPACE=ANY.  Would you see that also as a
 circumvention?
 
 Tne customers' perennial but impossible demand: Make it work, but
 don't change anything!  E.g.: allow volumes larger than 54 GB,
 but don't change the 3390 geometry!

To the last question, if it required the applications to be rewritten: Yes. 

My intention was not to solve my immediate need, but to propose a more general 
solution that can be used by wider group. 

Regarding zFS: this would require a change in many places: procedures, JCLs and 
routines for administration of space (for the UNIX side). 
Of course, if You see UNIX as the future and MVS (or maybe just its file 
system) as something to leave behind, You are right. 
But my view is that MVS could and should be improved. 


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 





 

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


SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Thomas Berg
I'm beginning to wondering... :)
But I started in februari 1979...


 
Regards, 
Thomas Berg 
_ 
Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK 

 -Ursprungligt meddelande-
 Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För
 Frank Swarbrick
 Skickat: den 13 februari 2012 19:27
 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Ämne: Re: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 Are you sure you are a mainframer?
 
 
 
 
  From: Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 4:27 AM
 Subject: Archaic allocation in JCL   (Was: Physical record size query)
 
 I can't understand why we STILL need to specify SPACE= (etc) for an
 allocation of a dataset.
 You normally don't do that in other OS (platforms), You always (both
 principally and in practice) want to allocate as much as is needed during
 execution
 
 If for backward compatibility it can't be done automatically, why not
 introduce a new keyword like e g SPACE=ANY ?
 
 
 
 Regards,
 Thomas Berg
 _
 Thomas Berg   Specialist   A M   SWEDBANK
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 
 
 
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:14 +0100, R.S. wrote:

The only application I know that manages extent size - that means using
some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka Wbesphere MQ
(since version 6 AFAIR).
It would be nice to have such facility in DATACLASS.
 
Nice indeed.  And someone else suggested DB2 as another good
performer.

And now I may add to my list another example or two of IBM's having
a good idea but implementing it in the wrong layer.  This should have
been done not in MQ and/or DB2, but in allocation where all applications
could take advantage of it.  All this could have been done without
changing the specification of the VTOC and DSCB nor making incompatible
changes to them.

Conway's Law.

-- gil

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


Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Field, Alan C.
Sent from my iPad

On Feb 13, 2012, at 14:53, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:

 On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:14 +0100, R.S. wrote:
 
 The only application I know that manages extent size - that means using
 some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka Wbesphere MQ
 (since version 6 AFAIR).
 It would be nice to have such facility in DATACLASS.
 
 Nice indeed.  And someone else suggested DB2 as another good
 performer.
 
 And now I may add to my list another example or two of IBM's having
 a good idea but implementing it in the wrong layer.  This should have
 been done not in MQ and/or DB2, but in allocation where all applications
 could take advantage of it.  All this could have been done without
 changing the specification of the VTOC and DSCB nor making incompatible
 changes to them.
 
 Conway's Law.
 
 -- gil
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 

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