Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:22:29 -0400
Reply-To: Jack Clark <jclark@HILLTOP.UMBC.EDU>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Jack Clark <jclark@HILLTOP.UMBC.EDU>
Subject: Re: SAS and SQL Server
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Some of the processing we do here takes advantage of the BULKLOAD=YES
option on the LIBNAME statement.
* libname to point to SQL Server - Dental tables ;
libname dntdb odbc noprompt="dsn=dental;" bulkload=yes;
drop table dntdb.test
In these processes, we are doing a drop of the existing SQL Server
table, then a complete replace with the new table. When we implemented
this, there was a dramatic reduction in time to create the new table.
Senior Research Analyst
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Sondheim Hall, 3rd Floor
1000 Hilltop Circle
Baltimore, MD 21250
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain information that is legally privileged and that is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying of this e-mail, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of this e-mail and/or documents attributed to this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately by phone and delete this entire e-mail. Thank you.-----Original Message-----
From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 1:15 PM
Subject: SAS and SQL Server
I've done some experiments comparing the amount of time required to
a SAS dataset using ODBC to SQL Server to the amount of time required
to "pull" data from SAS to SQL using a DTS package. On average, the
DTS "pull" is about 2.5 times faster than the SAS "push". Why is this?
Does anyone have suggestions for making the "push" faster?