mainframe optimum choice

Post anything related to mainframes (IBM & UNISYS) if not fit in any of the above categories

mainframe optimum choice

Postby ndashore20 » Sun Sep 25, 2016 10:38 pm

Please help me to understand why mainframe choose 27920 as a optimum block size ?? on what basis this size is choosen??
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2016 10:28 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: mainframe optimum choice


Re: mainframe optimum choice

Postby prino » Sun Sep 25, 2016 11:13 pm

Optimum blocksize for what?

An FB(123) dataset? Not!
A VB(123) dataset? Not!
AN FB(23456) dataset? Not!
Robert AH Prins
robert.ah.prins @ the.17+Gb.Google thingy

These users thanked the author prino for the post:
ndashore20 (Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:19 am)
User avatar
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:22 am
Location: Oostende, Belgium
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: mainframe optimum choice

Postby Robert Sample » Sun Sep 25, 2016 11:49 pm

The system will generally use half track blocking on a 3390. Since the half-track size is 27,998 the system will define a block size as close to this without going over. For variable length records, 27998 can be used. For fixed length records, divide 27998 by the record length and use the integer portion of the result (discard the fraction); multiply the record size by the resulting integer to get the block size.

These users thanked the author Robert Sample for the post:
ndashore20 (Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:56 am)
Robert Sample
Global moderator
Posts: 3242
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 8:32 pm
Location: East Dubuque, Illinois
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 204 times

Re: mainframe optimum choice

Postby steve-myers » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:50 am

Let me expand Mr. Sample's post.

When System/360 DASD was originally defined device capacities were rather limited. The IBM 2314 disk device, for example had a track capacity of 7294 bytes, if I remember correctly. The most effective use of these devices could be achieved when the BLKSIZE was close to 7294, so 7280 (INT(7294/80)*80) would be "optimal" for the 2314.

By the 1980s devices could store more than 32768 bytes on a track. Since data management has a restriction of 32760 bytes in a record, full track records were no longer possible; so the decision was made that an "optimal" record size would be defined as whatever value <= 32760 that permited 2 records on a track. As Mr. Sample says, this works out to 27,998 bytes per track for 3390 type devices, even the simulated 3390s now commonly used, and data sets containing 80 byte card images should use BLKSIZE=27920.

No reasonable person should have to memorize this garbage, much less do the arithmetic, so the system will automatically figure this out for you when you do not specify a BLKSIZE.

Global moderator
Posts: 1840
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:21 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 185 times

Return to All other Mainframe Topics


  • Related topics
    Last post