In one failing job, we get ICE046A E SORT CAPACITY EXCEEDED - RECORD COUNT 41,235,203 ICE046A E SORT CAPACITY EXCEEDED - RECORD COUNT 41,235,203 ICE253I 0 RECORDS SORTED - PROCESSED: 41,235,203, EXPECTED: 310,580,760 <== note very high expectation
As to how much DASD space is available, I have no idea. Not a storage guy. Virtual memory is whatever it is at z/OS 2.1. User tried tape sort but had the job cancelled after 24 hours. Unfortunately canceler apparently purged job as well, so nothing to look at. As for why specify SORTLIB DD: DFSORT requires it. Job will not run without it. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of R.S. Sent: Friday, June 08, 2018 2:33 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: SORTLIB DD Let me ask again: What is the size of input data? How much space do you have for temp datasets? How much memory can the job use? BTW: While sortworks on tape can be justified in case of lack of DASD space, I still see no reason to specify SORTLIB DD. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland W dniu 2018-06-07 o 20:14, Jesse 1 Robinson pisze: > Let me reiterate. The problem job tries to allocate more DASD work space than > *exists* on the system. SORTIN is on tape--multiple files. We have the > capability of putting more volumes online temporarily, but this is a major > PITA and requires intervention from the Storage boys. I'm hoping that tape > SORTWK will get the user over the occasional hump for this ad hoc > non-production job. It does not have to perform well. It just has to work. > > . > . > J.O.Skip Robinson > Southern California Edison Company > Electric Dragon Team Paddler > SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager > 323-715-0595 Mobile > 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW > robin...@sce.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of R.S. > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2018 2:49 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: (External):Re: SORTLIB DD > > Get rid of SORTLIB DD > Get rid of SORTWKnn DD > Use dynamic sortwork datasets, optionally set the number of datasets via > OPTION DYNALLOC Don't use tapes for sortwork > > BTW: > What is a size of input data? > How much space do you have for temp datasets? > How much memory can the job use? > > > My €0.02 > > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > Lodz, Poland > > > > > > > W dniu 2018-06-05 o 18:31, Jesse 1 Robinson pisze: >> We have a DFSORT job that wolfs down enormous amounts of SORTWK space. It >> has been exceeding the DASD capacity on the system where it runs, so we >> advised the user to point SORTWK to tape instead of DASD. Now it fails with >> >> IEC130I SORTLIB DD STATEMENT MISSING >> IEF472I CIHM373 STEP010 CIHM373 - COMPLETION CODE - SYSTEM=000 USER=0063 >> >> IBM doc indicates the need for SORTLIB with a 'tape sort'. We have no >> working example to share with the user. My question: what should DD SORTLIB >> point to? SMPE puts load modules into >> >> SYS1.SORTLIB >> SYS1.SICELINK >> >> Should the user specify only the first one or both? I hate to drag them into >> a sysprog guessing game. >> >> . >> . >> J.O.Skip Robinson >> Southern California Edison Company >> Electric Dragon Team Paddler >> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager >> 323-715-0595 Mobile >> 626-543-6132 Office <===== NEW >> robin...@sce.com<mailto:robin...@sce.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
