On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:36:44 -0400, Thompson, Steve <steve_thomp...@stercomm.com> wrote:
>-----Original Message----- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On >Behalf Of Patrick O'Keefe >Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 4:15 PM >To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu >Subject: Re: Concatenations and blocksizes > >On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:20:53 -0500, Mark Zelden ><mark.zel...@zurichna.com> wrote: >... > >Interesting wording. >"partitioned ... data sets ... accessed by QSAM ..." > >>f they really meant that, wouldn't that restrict this enhancement >>to a concatenation sequential datasets and/or PDS members? Ok. I shouldn't have included that statement. It just muddied the water. >Doesn't a PDS or concatenation of PDSs have to be accessed by >BPAM? That's what I was really trying to ask. >... >No. If you take a program that uses a QSAM DCB and point the DD >statement to a PDS with member name, it will read that member >and treat it as if it were reading a DSORG=PS data set. The QSAM >code will detect end of member and treat that as if it were EOD >(and I think it even drives your EOV exit if you have one). I know a single member can be read with QSAM. I assume a concatenation of members can be read by QSAM. I was actually trying to exclude that uninteresting case from consideration. >... >So if you concatenate a series of DSORG=PS data sets together, >you can't concatenate a PDS as a PDS in the middle. ... And I didn't want to. >... >OTOH, if you concatenate PDSs together as PDS and then stick in a >DSORG=PS I would imagine you will get a very interesting ABEND And luckily I didn't want to do that, either. I'm just puzzled that the enhancement limited itself to QSAM. No mention of BPAM. Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
