When writing to multiple ODBC tables on the same database (Oracle), is there any performance advantage by using just 1 ODBC stage and having all links point to that stage? This can get somewhat unwieldy when 15-20 links point to the same stage.
The flip side would be a dedicated ODBC stage for each table. However this can cause maintainance problems and hogs screen space.
Does each ODBC stage create its own DB connection? If so, is this a potential performance problem?
The interfaces are run nightly with around 500,000 rows per night across a distributed network.
Any wisdom will be greatly appreciated [:)]
Simon
ODBC Stage Performance
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
Hi Simon,
perfomance is a science for itself. You never can set up general rules for optimal or better performance. Even those who are saying native is factor 2 to 3 better than ODBC are wrong, I have seen situations where ODBC was about 20 % quicker than native.
Your only chance is to try and error in all directions. Having several DB-connections is often an performance advantage.
If your jobs work in the desired time frame, you don't need to chance anything. If not you have to try with all options you have, even runing processes serial instead of parallel.
Wolfgang Huerter
=====================
Cologne, Germany
perfomance is a science for itself. You never can set up general rules for optimal or better performance. Even those who are saying native is factor 2 to 3 better than ODBC are wrong, I have seen situations where ODBC was about 20 % quicker than native.
Your only chance is to try and error in all directions. Having several DB-connections is often an performance advantage.
If your jobs work in the desired time frame, you don't need to chance anything. If not you have to try with all options you have, even runing processes serial instead of parallel.
Wolfgang Huerter
=====================
Cologne, Germany