[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       sas-l
Subject:    Re: What are your wants, needs and problems with SAS Software?
From:       Charles Harbour <harbourcharles () JOHNDEERE ! COM>
Date:       2002-10-31 20:46:39
[Download RAW message or body]

We've been pestering SAS for some time to come up with a 'best practices'
guide for db2, to no avail.  Supposedly, they're working on a white paper
that addresses these issues, but it's hard to hit a moving target.  <g>

>From my point of view, it would be nice to have some sort of rule of thumb
for the relative performance of the various ways of hitting db2.  For
example, how much increased overhead is there for using the libname engine
vs. proc sql pass-through?  Is it a straight line, is it increased cpu time
only on compile/connect times, or is there some sort of law of decreasing
return?  Only with extensive testing can you answer these questions, and
there aren't many folks with that kind of time.  But the answer to these
questions could potentially be of great benefit in reduced computing or
development time--i.e. the tradeoff of whipping something together with
libname vs. development time creating a macro to create individual sql
statements with literals.

Another one of my whines is a better way to address syntax changes in
moving from one version of sas to another.  An if-then structure would be
easier than trying to read the entire 'what's changed' doc and try to
distill what's important to you.  For clarification: If you're using proc
access, the comparable syntax for using the libname statement would be....--
that sort of thing.

Chip Harbour
Technical Consultant
Capacity Planning / Computer Performance - S390 Support Services
Deere & Co
Moline, Ill. 61265

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]