On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:54:46 -0400, John Eells wrote: >... Anything that writes a combination of long and >short blocks can yield surprising results. (We found that z/OS fonts, >for example, use the least space at a counterintuitive block size.) > >For plain old sequential FB data, though, it's quite right that 32K is a >poor choice of block size. > >Bill Fairchild wrote: >> 3390 full track size is ca. 56K, and 3380 is ca. 47K. But you were right - >> 32K is still not optimal for 3390. ><snip> > BTW, what is the smallest block size that SDB will ever choose on a 3390? The answer may be surprising at first.
-- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
