On May 23, 2007, at 1:15 PM, Thomas Conley wrote:
I know SELTAPE was internalized eons ago, but I thought it was
internalized as
NEXT. I'm seeing what looks like RANDOM on z/OS V1R8. Is this a
bug or a
feature? My concern is that NEXT always seemed to be the best
algorithm to
spread out
ame Discussion List
05/23/2007 02:15 PM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
SELTAPE algorithm in z/OS
I know SELTAPE was internalized eons ago, but I thought it was
internalized as
NEXT. I'm seeing what looks like RANDOM on z/OS V1R8
What would you like to happen if the first mount is for 10 EXCPs and the
next one is for 10M?
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Conley [mailto:snip]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: SELTAPE algorithm in z/OS
I know SELTAPE was internalized eons ago
I know SELTAPE was internalized eons ago, but I thought it was internalized as
NEXT. I'm seeing what looks like RANDOM on z/OS V1R8. Is this a bug or a
feature? My concern is that NEXT always seemed to be the best algorithm to
spread out the pain and minimize certain drives getting hammered.
4 matches
Mail list logo