Converting Empty Strings to Blank - Server to Parallel Eds

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
iq_etl
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:26 am

Converting Empty Strings to Blank - Server to Parallel Eds

Post by iq_etl »

In 8.7 Server Edition we have created a routine that will evaluate strings for blanks, nulls, or empty and return blank. This routine works fine in 8.7, but now working in 9.1 Parallel Edition I'm wondering if there is a function or pre-existing routine that does this?

Is there a way to access this server routine (in BASIC)? Do I need to re-write the routine as a parallel routine (in C)? More importantly, is there functionality built into the Parallel Edition that I'm missing? I'm not seeing any, but want to be sure.

Thanks!
ray.wurlod
Participant
Posts: 54607
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by ray.wurlod »

There are lots of solutions but, without knowing your exact requirement/logic, we cannot comment on whether an out-of-the-box solution exists.

You can call BASIC routines from the BASIC Transformer stage in parallel jobs.

You can use server jobs.

You can rewrite the logic into a parallel routine.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
iq_etl
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:26 am

Post by iq_etl »

Good Morning, Ray.

Thanks for the response.

Essentially, we want to evaluate strings and provide blank when there is no data. Usually Nulls are desired, but we have several clients that prefer blank which is why we wrote this routine.

We could do it with a series of statements in the transformer, but obviously it's easier for maintenance in one routine.

Our team is hoping to take advantage of being in the parallel edition. Would we lose any efficiency/processing by using a BASIC Transformer stage in our parallel jobs? Would it make more sense to write a parallel routine (which needs to be in C, correct?)

Thanks!
chulett
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 43085
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by chulett »

iq_etl wrote:Would we lose any efficiency/processing by using a BASIC Transformer stage in our parallel jobs? Would it make more sense to write a parallel routine (which needs to be in C, correct?)
Yes. Yes. Yes++. :wink:
-craig

"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
rameshrr3
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 3:32 am
Location: BRENTWOOD, TN

Post by rameshrr3 »

Although a Parallel routine written in C will generally work just fine , it is recommended that you write routines in CPlusPlus(C++) and compile them as such.
Post Reply