Using Change Capture Stage

Post questions here relative to DataStage Enterprise/PX Edition for such areas as Parallel job design, Parallel datasets, BuildOps, Wrappers, etc.

Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy

Post Reply
opdas
Participant
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:25 am

Using Change Capture Stage

Post by opdas »

Hi,
I'm using change capture in my job. I'm testing with a small set of data.

I'm not geting the desired result when i try to run change capture stage in parallel mode, but it works fine and gives the desired result when run in sequential mode, and this doesn't solve my purpose as i'm going to run the job with a very large set of data.
Om Prakash


"There are things that are known, and there are things that are unknown, and in between there are doors"
kumar_s
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:00 pm

Post by kumar_s »

Change capture stage is build to run on parallel execution mode. It shouldnt give you any undesired result. But you could mention what is that you desire to get and what is the output from the stage. Perhaps you could concentrate on Partiton method used.
Impossible doesn't mean 'it is not possible' actually means... 'NOBODY HAS DONE IT SO FAR'
opdas
Participant
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:25 am

Post by opdas »

Kumar,
You are right , its working when i hash parton both the input set....but am i doing the right thing???? :?:
kumar_s wrote:Change capture stage is build to run on parallel execution mode. It shouldnt give you any undesired result. But you could mention what is that you desire to get and what is the output from the stage. Perhaps you could concentrate on Partiton method used.
Om Prakash


"There are things that are known, and there are things that are unknown, and in between there are doors"
opdas
Participant
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:25 am

Post by opdas »

is hash partitioning and sorting the data set before change capture are same? even sorting both set is not helping.....
Om Prakash


"There are things that are known, and there are things that are unknown, and in between there are doors"
ray.wurlod
Participant
Posts: 54607
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by ray.wurlod »

It is vital that both Data Sets are identically partitioned on the comparison keys, so that valid comparisons will be performed. It is highly desirable that both Data Sets are identically sorted on the comparison keys, so that efficient use can be made of memory. What do you mean by "the desired result"? And what are you getting versus what the Change Capture stage is documented as generating?
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
kumar_s
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:00 pm

Post by kumar_s »

opdas wrote: its working when i hash parton both the input set....but am i doing the right thing???? :?:
Yes you are doing the right thing.
As mentioned, both the dataset need to be sorted and corectly partitioned across nodes to get the correct result.
Impossible doesn't mean 'it is not possible' actually means... 'NOBODY HAS DONE IT SO FAR'
Post Reply