I would say a longer record length and less records, because there would actually be fewer reads if going through all the records. That is just my understanding, though, as I have not done any tests on this. But it also seems to be that any logicals put over such a file would be shorter by half also. Which would save DASD and perhaps speed things up a bit. The question I have, is better for what? Regards, Jim Langston Scott Swaim wrote: > Is it better to have a shorter record length and more records > or a longer record length and less records? > > ex: > > Rcd length = 80 # of rcds = 10,000 OR > Rcd length = 160 # of rcds = 5,000 > > Scott Swaim > email@example.com > > +--- > | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: firstname.lastname@example.org > +--- +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: email@example.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.