DSXchange

Hi there,

Since Datastage 6.0, the GUI version sequencer job is created to control ETL job run. The question here is: is there any benefit to use Unix shell scripts to control the job run, rather than the job sequencer. Especially, from 7.5, Datastage was added more stages to control the job run. To me, I like the GUI. It's visual and easy to see where the control flows go. It's like a map or text version description to tell you how to drive from Toronto to New York. Which one you prefer?

Thanks,

It's not DataStage jobs alone which need to be scheduled they are a ton of other process (example BI, Messaging Services etc.,) which also need to sync up and third party scheduling tools don't understand what a Job Sequence is they understand only UNIX Scripts!!!! :D

-- Aditya.

It depends upon your personal preference. Some like job sequences as they are more readable, easy to maintain, gui based as you pointed out, where as others prefer the old school, code it. Whether write a batch job, or a shell script or a control job.
i prefer a shell script as its much more easier for me to control restartability, passing parameters from one job to another job, creating job report in a delimited file which can be then loaded into a table for audit trails. Scripting gives me more flexiblity. Also archivals, staging files cleanup, all that extra stuff is much more feasible in a script.
Its basically personal preference and how you design the entire ETL cycle.
It really depends upon person to person.
Regards,

Any form of "computer programming" is actually communicating with the next programmer. Consider what the next programmer will find easier, but do not forget that, as aditya observed, there may be other activities that also need to be scheduled/controlled. Most of these could probably be managed via Execute Command activities job sequences.

If one were programming the computer, one would write entirely in binary.

Thanks all for your response.

Even you have lot of other processes needed to sync or co-operarte, gui still has tools to communicate with them, such as trigger files. gui has tools to do audit and logs. Is it a good practice to let shell script to control all job run, no squencer at all?

Thanks,

Use a script to invoke the master control job sequence if you want to feed the overall result back to an enterprise scheduler such as Control-M, UC4, SeeBeyond, etc.

Scripts suck. GUI is better. Old school is for music not IT.