MVSFORUMS.com

Dibakar

Hi

While writing a record from KSDS VSAM file to a temporary dataset I am getting following error

Cogito-Ergo-Sum · Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2003 10:33 am Post subject:

Diba,
Our inhouse quick ref tells me that your error code S013-34 stands for

semigeezer · Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2003 2:49 pm Post subject:

I too looked up the error in the IBM books (system codes, messages) but didn't find it too helpful so it is worth noting that temporary data sets sometimes have some odd quirks. For example, they often can not be allocated by name, at least through TSO's ALLOC command. That can cause problems in other programs as well. In this case it looks like whatever default attributes you are getting are not sufficent. Try adding attributes (lrecl, recfm, etc as needed). At least I'm curious, so let us know what you find.

moyeenkhan · Beginner Joined: 04 Dec 2002 Posts: 64 Topics: 21

You can use REUSE with a permanent dataset only. For a temporary dataset, you may have to ALLOC with all the parameters.

Dibakar · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2003 3:48 am Post subject:

After reading all replies and detail error message supplied by Cogito I felt that it has something to do with record length, format and blocksize. So here is what worked and what didn't.

Same error with:

Mike · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2003 10:49 pm Post subject:

Try RECFM (F,B) with the first two., the results might differ.
_________________
Regards,
Mike.

semigeezer · Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2003 12:35 am Post subject:

Not necessarily temp data sets, but temp data sets allocated to UNIT=VIO.

Also, REUSE relates only to the ddname, not to the data set, so it works with both permanent and and temp data sets. It boils down to a DAIR call (which eventually becomes an SVC99) to free the ddname before the allocation is done.

Dibakar · Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:59 am Post subject:

I used UNIT(VIO) and RECF(F,B). Now I/Os are little faster but allocation of new temp dataset appears to take more time than that of exixsting dataset with 'SHR' option.

Thanks again,
Diba.

Mike · Posted: Mon May 12, 2003 11:10 pm Post subject:

I would expect that to be the case. When creating a new dataset the volume has to be determined, the space earmarked for it's use the VTOC updated, the catalog updated. I've probably missed a few things as well. Whilst for an existing dataset the catalog, is searched and then dataset located, quite a bit less to do.
_________________
Regards,
Mike.

Dibakar · Posted: Tue May 13, 2003 10:04 am Post subject:

Thanks Mike,

I never thought beyong allocating space. I didn't understand why would catalog be updated for temporary datasets? Could you suggest some reference to learn morer on this topic.

Regards,
Dibakar.

semigeezer · Posted: Tue May 13, 2003 7:55 pm Post subject:

I think this thread is getting a bit strange. Temporary data sets do not end up in the catalog. They are in the VTOC of the volume only, but... unless the unit VIO is defined to real dasd, there is no writing to any real device other than memory and maybe a paging volume. VIO should be noticably faster. You can see if the allocation went to a real volume instead of VIO by using ISRDDN. It is not unusual for unit=vio to go to real DASD, but if it does, most of the performance benefits are gone. Also, if you are running on a 2nd level system (under VM), then VIO doesn't usually help quite as much as on real hardware.

(I'm a big fan of virtual I/O. When I had real the machine to myself, I used to put all of ISPF - panels, messages, ISPLLIB, etc., in VIO. Now that starts quickly!)

Dibakar · Posted: Wed May 14, 2003 2:48 am Post subject:

semigeezer,

As you suspected, allocation did not go to VIO.

Thanks,
Dibakar.

semigeezer · Posted: Wed May 14, 2003 10:10 am Post subject:

My pleasure. It is always a little bizzare when the 'system' doesn't do exactly what you asked it to do but what it does is technically correct. Hmmmmmm Rolling Eyes

Mike · Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 7:18 pm Post subject:

Dibkar,
ooops I didn't read the question properly obviously temp datasets don't get catalogged. Embarassed

_________________
Regards,
Mike.

Dibakar · Posted: Fri May 16, 2003 1:12 am Post subject:

No problem. Anyway your answer remains valid since my allocation did not go to VIO.

Dibakar.