There is a BUFL parameter, but it's not needed in this case; LRECL=max, BLKSIZE=max will do the job.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 6:26 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Unlike data sets concatenation - revised +1 Storage is a lot cheaper than programmer time writing exits and bit-twiddling DCBs. Isn't there a BUFL parameter that accomplishes the same thing and can be used without regard to actual BLKSIZE (in the case of RECFM=FB)? CM On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 17:08:54 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <paulgboul...@aol.com> wrote: >On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 13:44:21 -0700, Michael Stein wrote: > >>> 000234D0 E6D9D5C7 4BD3C5D5 4BD9C5C3 D6D9C46B | WRNG.LEN.RECORD, | >> >>A likely result from reading a block larger than the blksize. >> >Why does it say "RECORD" if it means "Block"? > >> ... >>What does the *SOURCE* DCB & JCL look like? Do either specify LRECL >>and/or BLKSIZE? >> >Just cut the Gordian Knot and specify the largest BLKSIZE expected; even 32760. >LRECL likewise. Storage is cheap nowadays. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
