On March 8, 1996, Lee Gunter wrote:
 
>Agreed!  User logging also complicates database capacity management due
>to the need to refresh logging cycles afterward - and on large
>databases, those changes can take hours!
 
As far as I know, data base capacity changes should NOT necessitate the
refreshing of logging cycles - with the following caveats:
 
To effect capacity changes, you must firstdisable logging. Once the changes
have been completed, logging can be re-enabled. The resulting warning
message can be ignored, subject to the point following.
 
In the event of subsequent data base recovery with the interrupted log file
(disabled, then re-enabled) it is possible that transactions could fail to
be recovered if, for example, a dbput was issued for a full dataset
(remember, in real time, we had, say, increased the capacity of the
dataset). No big deal. Simply start the recovery process over again - this
time performing appropriate capacity changes prior to recovering the log file.
 
I do understand that dataset re-packs DO require the refreshing of logging
cycles - but not capacity changes.
 
So, I don't understand why user logging should complicate the capacity
management issue - apart from the caveats indicated.
 
Unless, of course, my initial assumptions are incorrect.