Job compile location issue

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
dav_mcnair
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:42 pm

Job compile location issue

Post by dav_mcnair »

We are having an issue with a lookup stage behavior being compiled using DS client 7.5.1 vs. 7.5.2. The server is 7.5.2. I was always under the assumption that the job is compiled on the server and uses the version on the server and not on the client. If run a binary compare between the 2 executables their is a difference.

The lookup stage has a field name on the input dataset the matches a field name on the output dataset. The field on the output dataset is mapped to be populated from the reference link. The issue is if compiled under 7.5.1, and no match is found, it passes the value of the matching field from the input dataset to the output dataset but in 7.5.2 it writes a blank field since no match was found on the reference.

Any ideas? Does this seem like normal behavour?
ray.wurlod
Participant
Posts: 54607
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by ray.wurlod »

Has the Lookup Failed rule changed between the two jobs?
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
dav_mcnair
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:42 pm

Post by dav_mcnair »

No... The job design is the same just compiled with 2 different DS clients.
chulett
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 43085
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by chulett »

Sorry, but I'm going to state the obvious - you really shouldn't be using a client version that doesn't match your server version, no matter how minor that difference seems to be. Strange things happen.
-craig

"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
Post Reply