I wonder what application it is that justifies considering this. It is not the 80's anymore. And even with QSAM you have the BUFNO parameter. If you really want to go down to the details, consider EXCP (I did, 35 years ago).
Kees. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: 19 July, 2016 16:24 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Bsam VS Qsam for VB records IOW - unless you are very clever and you have a real need for I/O overlap performance, and you don't mind the maintenance programmer cussing you out, then I'd just go with QSAM. -- ******************************************************** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 ******************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
