On 7/22/2013 12:08 PM, Ed Jaffe wrote:
A customer (mildly) complained thatsome of our product allocations still
use BLKSIZE=3120. I vaguely remember trying to change all of them to
BLKSIZE=0 many years ago (probably before OS/390) and running into some
issues with certain IBM utilities. Unfortunately, I can't remember the
specifics.
In starting to revisit this again, I noticed numerousoccurrences of
'3120' in IBM help and documentation. For example, the TSO/E RECEIVE
command HELP claims that the log data set must be BLKSIZE=3120:
<TSO/E RECEIVE command HELP>
LOGDATASET You may specify an alternate data set to be
used for the logging of the transmitted data.
This data set will be created if it does not
exist. The data set should be created with
a logical record length of 255, a record format
of VB and a blocksize of 3120.
...
LOGDSNAME You may specify an alternate data set to be
used for the logging of the transmitted data.
This data set will be created if it does not
exist. The data set should be created with
a logical record length of 255, a record format
of VB and a blocksize of 3120.
</TSO/E RECEIVE command HELP>
Is this just outdated help? Or does this restriction still exist?
is z/OS still a "mine field" filled with subtle dependencies on
BLKSIZE=3120?
If such restrictions are known to still exist, can anyone help with any
specifics?
Thanks in advance...
Ed,
If there are any restrictions, they should be APAR'ed. 3120, 6160,
6144, etc. is SO 20th century. It's amazing to me how many IBM and OEM
products still ship these crappy blocksizes. It's why I submitted a
SHARE requirement to have AMATERSE support SDB. Isn't it ironic that a
utility designed to save DASD space uses a 6144 blocksize and actually
wastes DASD?
Regards,
Tom Conley
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
