|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
steve-myers
Active Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 917
Location: The Universe
|
|
|
|
In JCL,
// DD DISP=SHR,DSN=gdgbase
will allocate data sets in order newest, next,..., oldest
I believe it is possible to have it allocate oldest,... newest order, but I couldn't quickly find out how to do it.
Help! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10891
Location: italy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10891
Location: italy
|
|
|
|
| hit the mouse button a couple times more than needed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steve-myers
Active Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 917
Location: The Universe
|
|
|
|
Thank you Enrico.
I think I looked everywhere in the JCL Reference manual except the DD statement section. For some reason I thought it was a JOB statement parameter. Actually, now that I think about it, GDGORDER on the DD statement makes a lot more sense than a JOB statement parameter where you already have that GDGBIAS parameter to confuse thing even more.
I have to admit I'm really bad about silly Google search parameters.
Merry Christmas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg.Findeisen
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 1348
Location: Bamberg, Germany
|
|
|
|
| @Steve: If you want to have it permanently w/o altering the JCL, please see IDCAMS ALTER <gdg_base> LIFO|FIFO command. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steve-myers
Active Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 917
Location: The Universe
|
|
|
|
| Yes, I noticed that in the IDCAMS manual. It raises the question what happens when you combine them: FIFO defined for the index, and GDGORDER=LIFO. What happens when you ALTER FIFO a populated index created LIFO? I should go back to the IDCAMS manual and see if it says anything. I've mostly been working on other things; mostly interpreting IGGCSI00 output. The GDGORDER came up when I built a GDG index to investigate CSI00 output and then I thought about reordering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rohit Umarjikar
Global Moderator
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 3077
Location: NYC,USA
|
|
|
|
| I don’t remember but cbttapes have something for this , try GDGCOPY. When I searched it’s file482 not sure if that would do the trick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg.Findeisen
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 1348
Location: Bamberg, Germany
|
|
|
|
| steve-myers wrote: |
| Yes, I noticed that in the IDCAMS manual. It raises the question what happens when you combine them: FIFO defined for the index, and GDGORDER=LIFO. What happens when you ALTER FIFO a populated index created LIFO? I should go back to the IDCAMS manual and see if it says anything. I've mostly been working on other things; mostly interpreting IGGCSI00 output. The GDGORDER came up when I built a GDG index to investigate CSI00 output and then I thought about reordering. |
From my experience, the JCL GDGORDER always overrides the Catalog. FIFO basically makes the most sense with SMF-Data and alikes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
don.leahy
Active Member
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 767
Location: Whitby, ON, Canada
|
|
|
|
| Joerg.Findeisen wrote: |
| steve-myers wrote: |
| Yes, I noticed that in the IDCAMS manual. It raises the question what happens when you combine them: FIFO defined for the index, and GDGORDER=LIFO. What happens when you ALTER FIFO a populated index created LIFO? I should go back to the IDCAMS manual and see if it says anything. I've mostly been working on other things; mostly interpreting IGGCSI00 output. The GDGORDER came up when I built a GDG index to investigate CSI00 output and then I thought about reordering. |
From my experience, the JCL GDGORDER always overrides the Catalog. FIFO basically makes the most sense with SMF-Data and alikes. |
I prefer the JCL GDGORDER as it makes it clear that the traditional default is not being used. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg.Findeisen
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 1348
Location: Bamberg, Germany
|
|
|
|
| don.leahy wrote: |
| I prefer the JCL GDGORDER as it makes it clear that the traditional default is not being used. |
For SMF-Data our shop has altered all GDG Base entries. That was quicker than mass updates of JCLs on every LPAR. But yes, I see your point for "not so obvious" entries.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
