Steve Patrick says:
 
>"<Elbert E Silbaugh>" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>Few (if any) of mine are that way. And I decided it was OK that they
>>aren't because either the final expansion does not necessarily
>>have to be the same size as all the previous ones; and/or
>>
>>The final block of a detail does not have to be full. Therefore,
>>evenly divisible increments (as alluded to) may not always occur.
>
>Elbert, you may be correct. I have not tested all scenarios. However, I
>might
>be inclined, at this point, to disagree with you on the topic of "the final
>expansion does not necessarily have to be the same size as the previous
>ones.
>
>Unfortunately, after I sent the message, I thought it would have been nice
>to give an example of what I was referring to. So if you will stick with me
>for a few more seconds. If we have a data set with a MaxCapacity of 100,
>Initial capacity of 25, and an Incremental amount of 10; we will encounter
>capacities
>of 35,45,55...95. It is at this point, that when DDX is asked to expand the
>set (by 10) it can't because that would put it over the MaxCapacity limit.
>For which I kindly call a "stalled DDX". DDX was not designed to look at
>the current capacity and choose a smaller incremental amount to keep it
>from going
>going over the MaxCapacity limit. The final expansion IS the same as the
>previous ones...at least in my testing.
 
ummm
 
So, the final expansion is to .. 95, huh?
That means the MaxCapacity is NOT 100 but rather 95.
That means that when my program does a DBINFO mode 205 and it looks at
the MaxCapacity, the number is meaningless if the IncrementalCapacity is
not an even increment between CurrentCapacity and MaximumCapacity.
Which means a program does a DBINFO 205, determines there is space,
does a DBPUT, but gets an error indicating the data set is full,
but one uses a DBUtility and it says it is not at MaxCapacity yet,
and I use my trusty FREEDISC or whatever to find out I have GBs left of
free space...
 
So I try the program again to see if I can jam in those records one more
time...
 
This is fun stuff :-)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
>
>Hope this helps, because if you have the above scenario, I believe you will
>run into the problem. This is a simple example, and does not take into
>account the blocking factor multiple, as Ken Paul of ADAGER points out.
 
I truly do appreciate your efforts, but, alas
and sorry, I must be dense. I have been studying this for while.
 
Which problem? A damaged Detail set, or a Detail Set that can not be
expanded anymore even if it is NOT at MaxCapacity?
Or are they the same thing? Or am I confused about
something that is not confusing?
 
Elbert-am-waiting-for-final-enlightenment-Silbaugh (note dashes!)