Re: RPG Blocked Writes

[CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>]

  The existence of "at least one dependent logical file with a 
keyed sequence access path that does not share the access path of 
the keyed physical file member" is a reason why blocking will not be 
used.  So... Why not just OVRDBF like the documentation says? 
Unless there is a UNIQUE key, the effect of single row processing 
for having non-unique keyed LFs effect can be overridden, just as 
the quoted documentation from several messages back.  So although 
the attempted default normally would be for a 4K buffer for record 
blocking, the existence of the keyed LF causes that default to 
revert to single record I\O, and then an override can be used to set 
the preferred or otherwise more /appropriate/ block size.

Regards, Chuck

On 08-Jun-2010 14:31, Charles Wilt wrote:
> If the logical has keys, particularly unique keys or is set
> MAINT(*IMMED), then I would expect your results.
>
> It's not the logical per say, it's the existence of a
> MAINT(*IMMED) access path; note MAINT(*IMMED) is required for
> unique keys,  either in the physical itself or the logical.
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Kurt Anderson wrote:
> > I did some testing, and as it stands, my results show that
> > when the PF (keyed or not) has a LF, output writes to the PF
> > are not blocked. If the PF (keyed or not) does not have a
> > logical, the output writes are blocked.
> >
> > <<SNIP>>
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Kurt Anderson wrote:
> > > <<SNIP>>
> > >
> > > And the sentence after the quote I provided is: "The
> > > programmer is expected to override the file or use larger
> > > blocks if the default is not appropriate." But the default
> > > _is_ appropriate.  It's an output-only specification, and
> > > thus should block (barring other reasons for the file not
> > > blocking which isn't mentioned in the article).
> > >
> > > <<SNIP>>