The 3200 Maximum Blocksize used to be a Linkage Editor restriction.
Also, better JCL does not pay dividends for any software vendor. As long
as the old stuff works, nobody cares that it has been around since 2314s
and 2319s.
On 2020-04-22 15:34, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Well, I used a DCB exit to select a block size if none was provided. OTOH, I
kept seeing IBM procedures with 3200 long after that was too small.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://eur05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cfe4606446a024ce1ef3f08d7e6f42b0f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637231808688902735&sdata=GUKRdPCZgletvLmWTX8AsrOEwexm2Ictr2aFQRNdU%2B0%3D&reserved=0
________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Gerhard adam [gada...@charter.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 3:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Here we go again;
... and so goes the mythology. The truth is that programmers
routinely used lousy block sizes and wastes tremendous amounts of space. JCL
sizes were rarely scrutinized nor was data set usage. It was entirely possible
for test data to exist for weeks or months beyond its usefulness
This isn’t to say that money was obviousness spent and even wasted, but few
installations took managing their DASD seriously. They would worry about
saving a byte by packing a date while wasting 100 tracks due to poor blocking.
This is why nothing really happened until System Determined Blocksize, and the
Storage Administrator tools became available.
People certainly wrung their hands but rarely did anything about it
Get Outlook for iOS
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:08 PM -0700, "Pommier, Rex"
<rpomm...@sfgmembers.com> wrote:
Agreed. Another thing to remember was that we were dealing with disk volumes
measured in kilobytes or megabytes instead of terabytes. In addition, the site
I cut my teeth on had all removable disk packs that got rotated onto the drives
for processing of each application. Every byte saved per record gave us the
better chance of fitting the entire set of datasets on a single disk set so we
could process it.
Rex
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 12:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: Here we go again;
Faulty logic there. A byte here and byte there and pretty soon you have to buy
ANOTHER unit of DASD. It costs the same empty or full, but if it gets nearly
full you have to pay for another.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gerhard adam
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 10:06 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Here we go again;
The notion of “savings” was marketing nonsense. The DASD was paid for
regardless of whether it held a production database or someone’s golf handicap.
It cost the same whether it was empty or full. The notion of “saving” was
nonsense and even under the best of circumstances could only be deferred
expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from
disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it,
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard
copy format. Thank you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
