|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
PokerGuru
New User
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Europe
|
|
|
|
I need to change an extremely large PDSE to a PDS.
Is there a rule of thumb I can use to know how big I need to create THE PDS?
I can't find anything online and anytime I just try specifications it is too small when I try copy everything in the PDSE to the PDS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PokerGuru
New User
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Europe
|
|
|
|
size of it is as follows
Device type . . . . : 3390
Data class . . . . . : DCWRKD
Organization . . . : PO
Record format . . . : VB
Record length . . . : 137
Block size . . . . : 6160
1st extent blocks . : 4372
Secondary blocks . : 430
Data set name type : LIBRARY
Data set version . : 1
Current Allocation
Allocated blocks . : 4,372
Allocated extents . : 1
Maximum dir. blocks : NOLIMIT
Current Utilization
Used pages . . . . : 6,382
% Utilized . . . . : 97
Number of members . : 2,229 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nic Clouston
Global Moderator
Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 2454
Location: Hampshire, UK
|
|
|
|
| Your starting point would be to use the same space allocation as the PDSE. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PokerGuru
New User
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Europe
|
|
|
|
I used the same values but am getting a "No space on directory" when I try copy the PDSE members into the PDS created.
Any ideas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Woodger
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 09 Mar 2011
Posts: 7309
Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
| Make the number of directory blocks larger. How many members? What is the content of the PDSE? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10889
Location: italy
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Block size . . . . : 6160 |
ugly blksize
better to go for 27998 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PokerGuru
New User
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Europe
|
|
|
|
same problem when I specify 27668.
There are 2229 members in the PDSE.
And each member is just a flat file with text.
Current Utilization
Used pages . . . . : 6,382
% Utilized . . . . : 97
Number of members . : 2,229
thanks so far for help received |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steve-myers
Active Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 917
Location: The Universe
|
|
|
|
Space. This can be difficult.
Start with "Used pages." Ignore the LRECL and BLKSIZE values you see in normal displays. A PDSE page represents a 4096 byte data block, 10 pages per track if I remember correctly, so 6382 PDSE pages represents roughly 640 tracks. This is a good starting point.
Directory blocks is also difficult.
If the members have ISPF member statistics you can get 6 members per directory block, so 2229 members require 372 directory blocks, which will require roughly 9 tracks. Add that to the 640 tracks.
DCB attributes. This can also be a contentious issue. Many analysts have a rote rule about 1/2 track BLKSIZE. I don't go along with that analysis. I think something like 6160 will be fine, especially for a data set with many small members, which this appears to be. I would try
//output DD DISP=(NEW,CATLG),UNIT=xxx,SPACE=(CYL,(50,10,380),RLSE),
// DCB=(RECFM=FB,LRECL=80,BLKSIZE=6160),DSN=xxx
Obviously you need to fill in the unit and data set name to match your requirements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phrzby Phil
Senior Member
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 1050
Location: Richmond, Virginia
|
|
|
|
| Or make number of directory blocks REALLY big - copy and see how much used - then allocate another with this size. Should not take long. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steve-myers
Active Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 917
Location: The Universe
|
|
|
|
| Phrzby Phil wrote: |
| Or make number of directory blocks REALLY big - copy and see how much used - then allocate another with this size. ... |
True, but you waste time. Better to do the analysis.
Even so, the analysis could well be a waste of time. For example, I assumed the members have SPF stats. If I'm wrong, the directory will be way over allocated. Of course, all he has to do is browse the data set. If there are no ISPF stats, that will be immediately obvious |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phrzby Phil
Senior Member
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 1050
Location: Richmond, Virginia
|
|
|
|
| One minute to allocate and setup a batch copy job - or copy via line command. Computer does the work. Seems to be a good utilization of the computer vs. programmer's time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PokerGuru
New User
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Europe
|
|
|
|
I am using 3.2 to allocate the PDS, AND then 3.3 to copy members, and the latest I have tried is:
Allocated blocks . : 40,008
WITH
Secondary blocks . : 10000
WITH
Block size . . . . : 6160
and I can only ever get 209 members into the PDS, probably because the
maximum directory blocks is always 10..
Current Allocation
Allocated blocks . : 40,008
Allocated extents . : 1
Maximum dir. blocks : 10
Current Utilization
Used blocks . . . . : 458
Used extents . . . : 1
Used dir. blocks . : 10
Number of members . : 209
any ideas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Sample
Global Moderator
Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 8700
Location: Dubuque, Iowa, USA
|
|
|
|
| When you are using ISPF 3.2 to allocate the data set, why are you not increasing the directory blocks as well? The fields for primary, secondary, and directory blocks are on three consecutive lines of the screen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PokerGuru
New User
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Europe
|
|
|
|
thanks, job done
the following worked, thought the 6160 was enough for BLOCK Size like mentioned previously
Block size . . . . : 18452
1st extent tracks . : 510
Secondary tracks . : 218 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
