Concatenation of FB and VB isn't going to work. I prefer VB, but changing it after the fact is a user hostile move.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Tim Hare <haresystemssupp...@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 10:35 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Concatenating VB and FB ? I seem to be finding different answers on this. A vendor used to ship some files as PDSes with RECFM=FB and LRECL=80 (BLKSIZE 23440). User-customized members at this shop were put in a different PDS, with the same attributes, and concatenated in cataloged procedures, ahead of the vendor's libraries. Pretty standard practice I'm sure most are familiar with. Suddenly, because (I'm told) of a merging of code bases at the vendor, their PDSes are now RECFM=VB and LRECL=2044 (BLKSIZE 27998) ! My instincts tell me this isn't going to work well, but with changes in concatenation of libraries over the course of my career I'm not sure. Here's what I think: because of the "new" rule where the largest BLKSIZE sets the buffer size, we'll be OK for reading the blocks (23440 fits into 27998) but when we try to read a member from the VB library, the RDWs are going to mess things up. I have tried searching for the answer, but haven't, apparently, found the right source yet. What say you all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
