Re: Re: Sorting SMF records

-----------------------------------------<snip>-------------------------------------
yvette hirth wrote:

>  
>
> halfmeg wrote:
>
> >> 1. I reblock my SMF data using IEBGENER to a 2314 volume with a
> >> BLKSIZE of 7004 (LRECL=7000,RECFM=VBS). At this point I don't have
> >> to worry about capacity, since I only have about 800 TRKS worth of
> >> data.
>
> can you move this to a 3380/3390 volume, and can you "unspan" your data?
>
> a larger "track size" really means little wrt Hercules, as all the
> "disks" are files. but using an 80 or a 90 would give you the ability
> to use larger blocksizes.
>
---------------------------------<unsnip>-------------------------------
OS/360 didn't support any DASD device beyond the 3330-11. 3380/3390 are 
out of the question because of that limitation.

-----------------------------------------<snip>--------------------------------

>
> to me, the "spanned" DCB attribute might be causing the issue.
> traditionally, spanned attributes arose when either the record could be
> bigger than the LRECL, or in some cases to attempt to maximize space
> utilization. if spanned is not needed and can be removed, that will
> simplify the i/o logic and reduce the potential number of issues.
>
> see here:
>
> http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/v1r9/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zos.r9.cbcpx01/recfmv.htm
>
> i remember VS/VBS being more frequently used during 3330 and 3350 days.
> once the larger 3380 track size became popular, there didn't seem to
> be any great need for VBS.
>
> if you can (i.e., if the "S" spanned attribute is optional), try setting
> sortout to LRECL=7000,RECFM=VB (or even RECFM=V) and see what happens.
> or set LRECL=<as big as possible based on track size>.
>
> yes, more i/o will occur, and your job will probably run slower, but
> it's a good debugging technique for the problem you're reporting.
>
> yvette hirth
>
-------------------------------------<unsnip>-----------------------------------
It would help immensely if the SORT JCL and control statements could be 
posted. OS/360 SORT/MERGE handled VBS records very nicely but the 
control statements had to be perfect to do so. It may also be that the 
data contains an incomplete spanned record, not at all unusual.

Also, if you could find the FIXVBS program on the CBTTAPE.org web site, 
that might be useful in this situation. FIXVBS will delete any "partial" 
logical records that might be causing the problem. It should work just 
fine on OS/360, since that's where it was originally developed.

Rick 
<mailto:yvette-RPrnXxQTqyxWk0Htik3J/[email protected]?subject=Re:%20%5Bturnkey-mvs%5D%20Re:%20Sorting%20SMF%20records> 
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Re:%20%5Bturnkey-mvs%5D%20Re:%20Sorting%20SMF%20records>