On Monday, 09/14/2020 at 10:07 GMT, "Stanislawski, Shawn (National VM
Capability)" wrote:
> For RECFM V when new record is longer and it would be preferable to
avoid
> truncation, then there does not appear to be a "pretty" solution short
of
> re-platforming (e.g. "go use SFS", etc).
I actuall
t: Saturday, September 12, 2020 12:07 PM
To: CMS-PIPELINES@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [CMS-PIPELINES] Replace single record in file
The CMS EDF file system is a very lightweight file system that has survived
40+ years with this restriction. (EDF was introduced in SEPP or BSEPP,
40+ I
think.)
Back the
On Saturday, 09/12/2020 at 05:25 GMT, "John P. Hartmann"
wrote:
> EDF came as an add-on to VM/370 release 6 in 1979. Along with FBA
> support if memory serves.
I'm pretty sure that add-on was BSEPP or SEPP ([Basic] System Extensions
Program Product, I think), which was subsequently rolled in w
On 2020-09-12, at 06:18:25, Rob van der Heij wrote:
>
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 01:18, Stanislawski, Shawn (National VM Capability) <
> shaw...@dxc.com> wrote:
>
>> Would be preferable to avoid truncation of a longer new record when
>> dealing with recfm=VARIABLE.
>> But at this point, it sounds a
EDF came as an add-on to VM/370 release 6 in 1979. Along with FBA
support if memory serves.
Alan is not doing justice to the designers. Being copy-on-write, it was
the first CMS file system that had no leakage of disk blocks on crashes
or power outages. CDF had the choice of trashed files or b
Wasn't EDF new with VM/SP?
(I remember performance problems with CDF for large RECFM V files in my
first IBM years)
Kris Buelens,
--- VM/VSE consultant, Belgium ---
---
Op za 12 sep. 2020 om 19:07 schreef Alan Altmark :
>
The CMS EDF file system is a very lightweight file system that has survived
40+ years with this restriction. (EDF was introduced in SEPP or BSEPP, I
think.)
Back then VSAM was available to solve more complex data management issues.
Now, you re-platform.
Regards,
Alan Altmark
IBM
> On Sep 12, 20
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 01:18, Stanislawski, Shawn (National VM Capability) <
shaw...@dxc.com> wrote:
> Would be preferable to avoid truncation of a longer new record when
> dealing with recfm=VARIABLE.
> But at this point, it sounds as if there is not an elegant resource-light
> method for so doin
der Heij
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 2:51 AM
To: CMS-PIPELINES@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [CMS-PIPELINES] Replace single record in file
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 01:00, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> If you want to pad or truncate as needed, probably the simplest way is
> to convert V2C an
On 9/11/2020 11:10 AM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> The interaction with STRIP also needed a loving hand.
Ouch, now I'm thinking way too hard about STRIP C2V and lengths around 16K.
¬R
On 9/11/20 14:07, John P. Hartmann wrote:
There is no test case of the placement option with v2c.
Turns out there was a single one and it had the wrong result.
The interaction with STRIP also needed a loving hand.
On 9/11/20 01:00, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
Uh-oh. I must never have tried THIS before:
pipe literal 123| specs 1-* v2c 1.3 right | cons
1
That's just wrong.
¬R
This is a bug that no-one has complained about before.
The correct output is "123". That is, the placement has incorrect
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 01:00, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> pipe literal 123| specs 1-* v2c 1.3 right | cons
> > 1
>
> That's just wrong.
Yes, the x0001 that goes in is not the "length of the input field" but
rather what still fits in the output field after we reserved two bytes for
the length
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 01:00, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> If you want to pad or truncate as needed, probably the simplest way is
> to convert V2C and then back C2V. Assuming the input is numbered for
> DISKUPDATE:
>
Good to have another pair of eyes on it. I didn't interpret the question as
t
On 9/10/2020 3:09 PM, Stanislawski, Shawn (National VM Capability) wrote:
> Anyone have a great idea on how to use PIPE to replace single record
> at a specified record number in a file without having to read /
> write out the entire file, with the following caveats?
>
> * the file could be
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 21:09, Stanislawski, Shawn (National VM Capability) <
shaw...@dxc.com> wrote:
> Anyone have a great idea on how to use PIPE to replace single record at a
> specified record number in a file without having to read / write out the
> entire file, with the following caveats?
>
Anyone have a great idea on how to use PIPE to replace single record at a
specified record number in a file without having to read / write out the entire
file, with the following caveats?
* the file could be either recfm FIXED or VARIABLE
* the new record could potentially be either shor
17 matches
Mail list logo
