Re: UNIT=AFF was Re: UNIT=SEP still alive (?)

2013-09-03 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2013-09-02 19:54, Clark Morris pisze: On 1 Sep 2013 07:03:23 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: On 9/1/2013 6:47 AM, Tom Russell wrote: In the case of multiple steps each allocating one file on the same tape, and no AFF parameter used, there was (is?) a significant difference

Re: UNIT=AFF was Re: UNIT=SEP still alive (?)

2013-09-03 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2013-09-03 12:19, Paul Gilmartin pisze: On 2013-09-03, at 00:05, R.S. wrote: IMHO it's bad idea to use tapes for such operations. Tapes nowadays are for backups, dumps, ML2, etc. but not direct application use. My €0.02 We are still committed to deliver some products (or at least

UNIT=AFF was Re: UNIT=SEP still alive (?)

2013-09-02 Thread Clark Morris
On 1 Sep 2013 07:03:23 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: On 9/1/2013 6:47 AM, Tom Russell wrote: In the case of multiple steps each allocating one file on the same tape, and no AFF parameter used, there was (is?) a significant difference between JES2 and JES3. For allocating tape