| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
maverick05 Beginner

Joined: 15 May 2005 Posts: 72 Topics: 24
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:05 pm Post subject: Flat file size |
|
|
Hi,
I have unloaded a DB2 table with many variable columns into a flat file.
I believe the max size of the data in flat file can be found by multiplying total records and max logical record length.Any idea how to calculate the exact size of a flat file ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
papadi Advanced
Joined: 20 Oct 2009 Posts: 520 Topics: 1
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is no need to "calculate" the size. Once created it is fixed/known.
Using tso/ispf 3.4, look at the "info" for the file.
You might also look into using LISTDSI.
Once you get the "exact size" how will this be used? _________________ All the best,
di |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nic Clouston Advanced
Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 916 Topics: 6 Location: Dublin 2
|
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
I do not know about this but perhaps your unload job provide some statistics inclding bytes unloaded? _________________ JCL is a means by which the programmer makes known to the computer the resources required by the program to be executed and certain characteristics of these resources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
maverick05 Beginner

Joined: 15 May 2005 Posts: 72 Topics: 24
|
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| papadi wrote: | There is no need to "calculate" the size. Once created it is fixed/known.
Using tso/ispf 3.4, look at the "info" for the file.
You might also look into using LISTDSI.
Once you get the "exact size" how will this be used? |
I checked but the information is not accurate |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
papadi Advanced
Joined: 20 Oct 2009 Posts: 520 Topics: 1
|
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I checked but the information is not accurate
| This is like posting "it didn't work" - which is a complete waste of time. . .
You need to post what the system showed and what you believe should have been the size. And why you believe this. _________________ All the best,
di |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kolusu Site Admin

Joined: 26 Nov 2002 Posts: 11184 Topics: 70 Location: San Jose
|
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:50 am Post subject: Re: Flat file size |
|
|
| maverick05 wrote: | Hi,
I have unloaded a DB2 table with many variable columns into a flat file.
I believe the max size of the data in flat file can be found by multiplying total records and max logical record length.Any idea how to calculate the exact size of a flat file ? |
Size as in GB/MB? Check this link which might help
http://www.mvsforums.com/helpboards/viewtopic.php?t=28 _________________ Kolusu - DFSORT Development Team (IBM)
DFSORT is on the Web at:
www.ibm.com/storage/dfsort |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
taltyman JCL Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Dec 2002 Posts: 310 Topics: 8 Location: Texas
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm guessing here since you aren't posting enough information but...
this is a variable record length flat file format
you take the longest record length and multiply it by the number of records to come up with your max size statement
now you want to really know the exact size as determined by bytes or whatever actually used, not how much space it actually needed as reported by 3.4 and then line option I?
In over 30 years of mainframe experience I've never seen a need for this kind of information. Tell us what you are trying to accomplish |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
maverick05 Beginner

Joined: 15 May 2005 Posts: 72 Topics: 24
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 3:35 pm Post subject: Re: Flat file size |
|
|
| kolusu wrote: | | maverick05 wrote: | Hi,
I have unloaded a DB2 table with many variable columns into a flat file.
I believe the max size of the data in flat file can be found by multiplying total records and max logical record length.Any idea how to calculate the exact size of a flat file ? |
Size as in GB/MB? Check this link which might help
http://www.mvsforums.com/helpboards/viewtopic.php?t=28 |
Yes.Size as in GB/MB. Thanks Kolusu for the link.
In the above link in your last posting, you said
"blocksize of 27,920 is efficient when compared to blocksize of 32720.
so to accomadate 600,634 records you would need (600634/6135) = 97.90 rounded to 98 cylinders
so to accomadate 600,634 records you would need
(600634/10470) = 57.367 rounded to 58 cylinders "
So can I say that the file size for the file with the blocksize of 27,920 is (98*15*55996 bytes = 82.3 MB) and file size for the file with the blocksize of 32,720 is (58*15*55996 bytes = 48.7 MB) ?
So which means the file size varies from file to file for the same number of records with same data and logical record length.Please correct me if I'm wrong.
For our requirement, we have to FTP files from one mainframe to another mainframe,so we need to provide the file size of the flat files so that we can have a guess on how big the data is getting migrated. So I wanted to know the file size. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
William Collins Beginner
Joined: 03 Jun 2012 Posts: 123 Topics: 0
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
With the 32K blocksize, you will have a lot of empty space on each track. So your file will occupy more tracks, more cylinders. Your file will be "bigger" in terms of cylinders, but will contain the same amount of data.
With the optimal blocksize, the file will be considerably smaller, in terms of using fewer cylinders. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
maverick05 Beginner

Joined: 15 May 2005 Posts: 72 Topics: 24
|
Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| William Collins wrote: | With the 32K blocksize, you will have a lot of empty space on each track. So your file will occupy more tracks, more cylinders. Your file will be "bigger" in terms of cylinders, but will contain the same amount of data.
With the optimal blocksize, the file will be considerably smaller, in terms of using fewer cylinders. |
I understand that.My question is in terms of total size in GB, does it vary between the two files? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
papadi Advanced
Joined: 20 Oct 2009 Posts: 520 Topics: 1
|
Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
No. Space allocated will differ but the bytes of user data will remain the same. _________________ All the best,
di |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
maverick05 Beginner

Joined: 15 May 2005 Posts: 72 Topics: 24
|
Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| papadi wrote: | | No. Space allocated will differ but the bytes of user data will remain the same. |
yes.You are confirmed.I confirmed this by FTPing both the files with different block sizes and both of these files have the same size on Windows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nic Clouston Advanced
Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 916 Topics: 6 Location: Dublin 2
|
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do not understand why you would think that you would have more data just because the data set size is different because of different block-sizes! Di you think that you would get some free data? _________________ JCL is a means by which the programmer makes known to the computer the resources required by the program to be executed and certain characteristics of these resources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|