Write the records to thee total size(including reserved).
Example. 500 bytes of data and 500 bytes "reserved"
If the record written is 1000 bytes long, but you are only using the 1st 500
bytes, up to 500 bytes of additional information could be added to the record,
without having to alter the
but I want to clarify what you are
suggesting.
Thanks!
Frank
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of
Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 6:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject:
In IBM parlance this is a "reserved" field.
Define the LREcL to the max needed
Double that
Add 10%
This is the LRECL you define.
Go back to the original LRECL and define what you need.
Define the remainder as "reserved for future use".
In that way, you only have to change the record defintions,
W dniu 2017-01-11 o 22:30, Frank Swarbrick pisze:
Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of 32761,
which seems to be the largest value for this parm for an UNSPANNED dataset?
Besides CISZ and other performance issues there is another big issue:
the application.
Let's
With the paucity of information in your original post it definitely seemed
an... odd... idea.
I hate being "near" limits. To give an example, you have found something that
says your can have 32761 for your data in VSAM (before extending yourself), and
yet you can't have that amount of data for
to 'expand'
the record length.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of CM
Poncelet <ad...@poncelet-adsl.demon.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 6:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VSAM: Why
No problem provided you define 32K LSR pools (from memory, 3) in CICS
and monitor their (E)DSA usage. But why define MAXLRECL=32760 at all?
On 11/01/2017 22:53, Greg Dyck wrote:
> On 1/11/2017 3:30 PM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>> Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of
TSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of
Lizette Koehler <stars...@mindspring.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 3:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?
Sounds like you need a DB2/IMS database rather than a VSAM database.
However, does the record length change that much
On 1/11/2017 3:30 PM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of 32761,
which seems to be the largest value for this parm for an UNSPANNED dataset?
I believe it will force your CI size to be 32K which is not something I
would want to do unless
age-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 2:31 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?
>
> Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MA
Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of 32761,
which seems to be the largest value for this parm for an UNSPANNED dataset?
I always hate having to do a backup/delete/define when adding new data to a
file. Especially for a file defined to a CICS region that is up
11 matches
Mail list logo
