Hi All,
One of our application programmer has created a PDS with below attributes :
Data Set Name . . . :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST
General Data Current
Allocation
Management class . . : **None** Allocated blocks . :
741
Storage class . . . : TPUSC
Operations
HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS
P 408.970.4458 / C 408.332.8566
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
jagadishan perumal
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 11:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: BLDL error Cause
Hi All,
One of our
W dniu 2011-10-24 08:07, jagadishan perumal pisze:
Hi All,
One of our application programmer has created a PDS with below attributes :
Data Set Name . . . :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST
General Data Current
Allocation
Management class . . : **None** Allocated
jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:canhhcyrsdw_reish_oibs2_kjmpclypuzbmr8udtz_vnoyi...@mail.gmail.com
...
Hi All,
One of our application programmer has created a PDS with below
attributes :
Data Set Name . . . :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST
General Data
Message -
From: jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 11:07:19 PM
Subject: BLDL error Cause
Hi All,
One of our application programmer has created a PDS with below attributes :
Data Set Name . . . :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST
General
This is not a PDS, it has 0 directory blocks. (Maximum dir. blocks : 0)
But it says Data set name type : PDS
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
kees.verno...@klm.com wrote:
jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com wrote in message
A PDS with zero tracks cannot contain data, a PDS with zero dir. Blocks
cannot contain members.
Specify directory blocks.
Kees.
jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:CANHhCyS-gcXY8XnJ1QJBQC=6teqtnmslznjitq+locfqrto...@mail.gmail.com
...
This is not a PDS, it has 0
W dniu 2011-10-24 09:05, jagadishan perumal pisze:
This is not a PDS, it has 0 directory blocks. (Maximum dir. blocks : 0)
But it says Data set name type : PDS
Yes, it says, so what?. It says PO, PDS, *and* directory 0. That means
your dataset (partially) looks like PDS, but it cannot hold
Hi All,
I will ask the programmer to delete and re-create the dataset. Meanwhile I
will examine His JCL(PDS allocation).
Regards,
Jags
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
kees.verno...@klm.com wrote:
A PDS with zero tracks cannot contain data, a PDS with zero dir. Blocks
jagadishan perumal wrote:
This is not a PDS, it has 0 directory blocks. (Maximum dir. blocks : 0)
But it says Data set name type : PDS
Believe them. Trust me on this one.
Your dataset is defined on the OUTSIDE as a PDS, but the INTERNAL organization
is corrupt (Max Dir Blocks = zero).
Hi All,
One of our application programmer has created a PDS with below attributes
:
Data Set Name . . . :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST
General Data Current
Allocation
Management class . . : **None** Allocated blocks . :
741
Storage class . . . : TPUSC
How can you have a PDS with ZERO directory blocks?
-jc-
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of jagadishan perumal
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 1:07 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: BLDL error Cause
Hi All,
One
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 06:57:33 -0400, Lizette Koehler wrote:
In most cases full track blocking will work fine.
Did I miss the announcement that block sizes greater than 32K are
supported? What release was that?
--
Tom Marchant
Hi,
What release was that?
Its 1.8
Regards,
Jags
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Tom Marchant m42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.comwrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 06:57:33 -0400, Lizette Koehler wrote:
In most cases full track blocking will work fine.
Did I miss the announcement that block sizes greater
Did I miss the announcement that block sizes greater than 32K are
supported? What
release was that?
--
Tom Marchant
Okay a slight clarification. 32K is the largest I know of for full track
blocking on DASD. Not sure about EAVs or Tape. The discussion of Full
Track Blocking revolves
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:12:00 -0400, Lizette Koehler wrote:
Did I miss the announcement that block sizes greater than 32K are
supported? What release was that?
--
Tom Marchant
Okay a slight clarification. 32K is the largest I know of for full track
blocking on DASD.
Ok. 32K has been
In 6795006467018006.wa.m42tomibmmainyahoo@bama.ua.edu, on
10/24/2011
at 07:19 AM, Tom Marchant m42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.com said:
Did I miss the announcement that block sizes greater than 32K are
supported?
Yes, but it was for tape.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
In
canhhcyrsdw_reish_oibs2_kjmpclypuzbmr8udtz_vnoyi...@mail.gmail.com,
on 10/24/2011
at 11:37 AM, jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com said:
Maximum dir. blocks : 0
?
When he tries to allocate a member within the dataset :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST(map), he gets a message as BLDL error
1. Was
On 24 October 2011 02:07, jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com wrote:
When he tries to allocate a member within the dataset :
TPUN011.NEWMAPST(map), he gets a message as BLDL error I tried searching
some error related to PDF as starting with ISR but I was not able to
fetch any error
On 10/24/2011 8:19 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
Did I miss the announcement that block sizes greater than 32K are
supported? What release was that?
It depends on your definition of supported - I had a job that
used BSAM to manipulate blocks larger than 32K (disk and tape).
If you have an even
In 056c01cc924e$84278a70$8c769f50$@mindspring.com, on 10/24/2011
at 09:12 AM, Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com said:
If you are running on OS/390 2.10 or later, then you know that BSAM,
BPAM and QSAM support LBI on disk, tape, spooled, subsystem and dummy
data sets
Not on disk.
--
21 matches
Mail list logo
