Gerhard, Why don't you just fix the VIO Maxsize in SMS - sooo much easier!
Ron > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Gerhard Postpischil > Sent: Friday, 27 January 2006 3:09 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Is VIO mandatory? > > Greg Price wrote: > > Years ago I found directing compiler (PL/I and Assembler) work files to > > VIO could reduce the elapsed time of a compilation to a fraction of what > > it otherwise would be. May not be true now... or systems are so fast > it > > doesn't matter much anymore. > > Months ago I found that using VIO for an assembly (XF under turnkey) > that produces a prodigious volume of error messages will crash MVS. As a > result, every one of my PROCs that specifies VIO does so with a > replaceable variable (WORK=). If I assemble a large program I'll use > SYSDA the first try, then switch back. > > Gerhard Postpischil > Bradford, VT > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
