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.