Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote in message news:2205241542597622.wa.paulgboulderaim@bama.ua.edu... On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:14 +0100, R.S. wrote: The only application I know that manages extent size - that means using some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:28:58 +0100, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM wrote: Paul Gilmartin wrote in message And now I may add to my list another example or two of IBM's having a good idea but implementing it in the wrong layer. This should have been done not in MQ and/or DB2, but in allocation where

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Gerhard Postpischil
On 2/14/2012 9:42 AM, Thomas Berg wrote: AFAICS, what needs to be changed is just the interpretation of the SPACE parm and the actual allocation on disk at the time of execution. - There have been changes in the JCL language the latest Years: LIKE, DCB subparms outside of the DCB parm, etc.

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-14 Thread Ron Hawkins
Thomas, I've done this with DFSMS for a large, multi-country application where the developers simply coded UNIT=SMALL, MEDIUM, LARGE and HUGE in the JCL. The ACS routines took this UNIT value, along with some other logic and assigned a standard space allocation using the appropriate DATACLAS.

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2012-02-13 14:28, Thomas Berg pisze: [...] With SPACE=ANY, the needed space is allocated and extended during the execution. So You don't do any preallocation of a specified amount of space. Thomas, Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target. It is not JCL

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:48:57 +0100, R.S. wrote: Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target. It is not JCL problem, it is z/OS problem. To fill the requirement the sapce should be allocated ad hoc, cluster after cluster (*). That requires total VTOC revolution. What

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2012-02-13 16:14, Paul Gilmartin pisze: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:48:57 +0100, R.S. wrote: Your idea is worth discussion, but not your requirement is off target. It is not JCL problem, it is z/OS problem. To fill the requirement the sapce should be allocated ad hoc, cluster after cluster

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:13:48 +0100, Thomas Berg wrote: Can you use UNIX files (zFS) for your purposes and avoid the archaism? Not practically. But that would be a circumvention, not a solution as I see it. When something doesn't work as desired, and it's impractical to fix it (R.S. appears

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:14 +0100, R.S. wrote: The only application I know that manages extent size - that means using some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka Wbesphere MQ (since version 6 AFAIR). It would be nice to have such facility in DATACLASS. Nice indeed. And someone else

Re: SV: Archaic allocation in JCL (Was: Physical record size query)

2012-02-13 Thread Field, Alan C.
Sent from my iPad On Feb 13, 2012, at 14:53, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:23:14 +0100, R.S. wrote: The only application I know that manages extent size - that means using some algorithm for extent increase - is MQ Series aka Wbesphere MQ (since version