RE: Reuse vs. Reorg

["Morgan, Paul" <Paul.Morgan@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave,

If you have some processing that is in creation date sequence not reusing deleted records keeps the records physically in that sequence.  If you have a lot of sequential retrieval on records based on creation date reusing deleted records will cause you to bounce around in the file and you can't use file blocking as effectively.

If you use CREATE TABLE in SQL instead of CRTPF the default is *YES so it's not always defaulted to *NO.

Paul

Principal Programmer Analyst
IS Supply Chain/Replenishment

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of daparnin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 9:39 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Reuse vs. Reorg

We have a file that is somewhat dynamic.  Records are generated, they are 
kept for awhile, some are deleted, others are generated, and so on.  The 
deleted records increases by about 100,000 per day.  We run a reorg once a 
week to get the deleted records back.  I had thought about changing the 
file to reuse deleted records to minimize the need to do reorgs.  Is there 
any downside to this?  My boss thought that if the default for files was 
*NO then there might be a reason that we wouldn't want to do it.  This 
isn't a file where we would want/need to reactivate the deleted records. 
It would be easier to restore from a backup or just regenerate them. 
Thoughts?


Dave Parnin