MVSFORUMS.com

Ram · Beginner Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Posts: 53 Topics: 12

Hi ,

I am facing a really wierd problem. I am trying to compile a IDMS Cobol program and the compile job is abending with RC=16 Crying or Very sad

. When I look into the logs, it says SIZE parameter too small for this pgm. The compiler options are as follows :

CLI,APO,LIB,DMA,NOSEQ,SXR,DYN,TER,NODUMP,ADV,
OPT,NOSTA,NOFLO,NOSYM,'SIZE=MAX','BUF=512K' & the compiler name is IKFCBL00. The same pgm compiles fine when I change the SIZE parameter to 512K. Confused

. Please help .

Ram

kolusu · Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2004 10:38 am Post subject:

Ram,

It will be easier if you can post the apporiate error messages.

Kolusu
_________________
Kolusu
www.linkedin.com/in/kolusu

Ram · Beginner Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Posts: 53 Topics: 12

Kolusu,

Here is the error message that I am getting during compilation of the program.

IKF0009I-W BUF PARAMETER IGNORED. DEFAULT USED.
IKF0001I-D SIZE PARAMETER TOO SMALL FOR THIS PROGRAM.

Ram

The good life is one that is inspired by love and true knowledge -- Bertrand Russell.

Mike Chantrey · Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:14 am Post subject:

My manuals do not mention MAX as a valid value for SIZE. I would guess that it is ignoring this and using the default of 128K, which is not enough, explaining why it works when you increase it to 512K.

Mike Chantrey · Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:20 am Post subject:

I just tried SIZE=MAX and it is ignored. No error, no warning, it just uses the default. Run with SIZE=MAX and look at the "options in effect" part of the compiler output and you will see what SIZE value the compiler is actually using.

Ram · Beginner Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Posts: 53 Topics: 12

Hey Mike,

The pgm is compiling fine now with the default parameters. Very Happy

To answer your question I tried compiling the job with SIZE=512K and here are the compiler options in effect.

*OPTIONS IN EFFECT* SIZE = 524288 BUF = 131072 LINECNT = 57 ......

I was making changes to an existing pgm and the changes made by me was definition of a table in working storage. It was then I started facing the problem. Some how this table definition did'nt suit the logic so I deleted it and added a group level element which had two elements under it. I later compiled this pgm with the defaults and much to my amazement it compiled fine . Shocked

Hope whatever I have written makes sense. Razz

Thanks,

Ram