ODBC and Plugin
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
ODBC and Plugin
Hi All
Whats the difference between using Plugin and ODBC stage, i tried using both the stages for same job and i don't see any change in the performance, if we have to choose between two ,if both stages meet all your requirements for data extraction or transformation. Which one should i use?
Thanks
Nag
Whats the difference between using Plugin and ODBC stage, i tried using both the stages for same job and i don't see any change in the performance, if we have to choose between two ,if both stages meet all your requirements for data extraction or transformation. Which one should i use?
Thanks
Nag
hmm.
The Plugin/OCI stages offer Native connectivity to the dbms which usually means greater control over commit points and select array sizes. Typically the OCI stages will outperform ODBC if configured correctly.
Also the OCI stages often do not require the overhead of creating and maintaining ODBC DSN's, which can be a security problem.
Also the OCI stages often do not require the overhead of creating and maintaining ODBC DSN's, which can be a security problem.
-
- Premium Member
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:24 am
- Contact:
Performance depends up on load size. For big loads you will see diffeence in performance for a given same resources. Due to the connectivity methods it varies. Plugin uses native/third party drivers designed for that DBMS, where as ODBC uses ODBC drivers( flexible to connect to any DBMS). In case of Plugin, need to redesign the job by changing the stage type, if source/target type changes(more maintainanace).
Sree Boyapati
Sr. ETL Architect
Certified Developer in DataStage, QualityStage, Information Analyzer.
Sr. ETL Architect
Certified Developer in DataStage, QualityStage, Information Analyzer.
-
- Participant
- Posts: 3593
- Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 5:25 pm
- Location: Australia, Melbourne
- Contact:
In version 7.1 you get the best of both worlds. The dynamic database stage works for multiple database types such as Oracle, DB2 and SQL Server and underneath the covers it has native connectivity. If you parametise it correctly you can change database types at run time.
I always use the native plugin where it is available to get the performance advantages described.
I always use the native plugin where it is available to get the performance advantages described.
Certus Solutions
Blog: Tooling Around in the InfoSphere
Twitter: @vmcburney
LinkedIn:Vincent McBurney LinkedIn
Blog: Tooling Around in the InfoSphere
Twitter: @vmcburney
LinkedIn:Vincent McBurney LinkedIn
-
- Participant
- Posts: 3593
- Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 5:25 pm
- Location: Australia, Melbourne
- Contact:
I reckon you are more likely to get a response on this at an Oracle or RDBMS forum, if you do get an answer please post it back here as it is an interesting comparison.
Certus Solutions
Blog: Tooling Around in the InfoSphere
Twitter: @vmcburney
LinkedIn:Vincent McBurney LinkedIn
Blog: Tooling Around in the InfoSphere
Twitter: @vmcburney
LinkedIn:Vincent McBurney LinkedIn
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
My experience has been that there's not much difference for SELECT (for most databases) between native API and ODBC, but that native API is much faster than ODBC when it comes to INSERT and UPDATE.
But, then, I even avoid the native API in this case, preferring bulk load wherever possible.
But, then, I even avoid the native API in this case, preferring bulk load wherever possible.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.