What makes Connectors bettter?
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:21 am
note: Job Type actually for both Server & Parallel jobs.
note: OS Type actually for Windows & Unix.
("All Of The Above" not an option in the Job Type & OS Type lists )
So I was RTFM'ing about Connectors (excerpt below) and I started wondering why IBM claims that Connectors are better.
For example...
-- Did they rewrite the Connectors in python? Or java? *shrug* Or whatever language.
-- Are they better for only Parallel jobs (e.g. did they improve up how they work inside of orchestrate?)
-- Are they any better for Server jobs? (Apparently at least somewhat better, since IBM deprecated "Dynamic RDBMS" for Server jobs.
The searching I've done on DSXchange shows Connectors were not so stable in early DS 8.1 releases. But I haven't found anything yet that talks about why Connectors are different; what it is that makes them "better".
The docs say Connectors "offer better functionality and performance". That's swell, but how do Connectors do that? What makes them better?
I'd welcome any insight you can share.
John
----------------------------------
Documentation Excerpt from p. 5 "Connectivity Guide for DB2 Databases" (i46decd2.pdf)
--- begin excerpt---
Connectors, which offer better functionality and performance, replace some stages, which have been deprecated and removed from the palette.
...
When you create new jobs, consider using connectors instead of the deprecated stages. The following table describes which connector to use in place of which deprecated stages:
Table1. Stages and corresponding connectors
Deprecated stages
DB2Z
DB2UDBAPI
DB2UDBEnterprise
DB2UDBLoad
Connectors
DB2Connector
Deprecated stages
Dynamic RDBMS
Connectors
DB2Connector
OracleConnector
ODBCConnector
Deprecated stages
ODBCEnterprise
Connectors
ODBCConnector
etc...
--- end excerpt---
note: OS Type actually for Windows & Unix.
("All Of The Above" not an option in the Job Type & OS Type lists )
So I was RTFM'ing about Connectors (excerpt below) and I started wondering why IBM claims that Connectors are better.
For example...
-- Did they rewrite the Connectors in python? Or java? *shrug* Or whatever language.
-- Are they better for only Parallel jobs (e.g. did they improve up how they work inside of orchestrate?)
-- Are they any better for Server jobs? (Apparently at least somewhat better, since IBM deprecated "Dynamic RDBMS" for Server jobs.
The searching I've done on DSXchange shows Connectors were not so stable in early DS 8.1 releases. But I haven't found anything yet that talks about why Connectors are different; what it is that makes them "better".
The docs say Connectors "offer better functionality and performance". That's swell, but how do Connectors do that? What makes them better?
I'd welcome any insight you can share.
John
----------------------------------
Documentation Excerpt from p. 5 "Connectivity Guide for DB2 Databases" (i46decd2.pdf)
--- begin excerpt---
Connectors, which offer better functionality and performance, replace some stages, which have been deprecated and removed from the palette.
...
When you create new jobs, consider using connectors instead of the deprecated stages. The following table describes which connector to use in place of which deprecated stages:
Table1. Stages and corresponding connectors
Deprecated stages
DB2Z
DB2UDBAPI
DB2UDBEnterprise
DB2UDBLoad
Connectors
DB2Connector
Deprecated stages
Dynamic RDBMS
Connectors
DB2Connector
OracleConnector
ODBCConnector
Deprecated stages
ODBCEnterprise
Connectors
ODBCConnector
etc...
--- end excerpt---