![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hi, We have several large and complex DTS packages for converting from OLTP to Star schema, and maintaining them on SQL server is becoming quite cumbersome. Additionaly, we have to change the server/db names and other parameters for different client installations and we're currently doing this using INI files. We have multiple developers working on the same set of pkgs and, needless to say, version control is a nightmare. I'm now thinking about migrating the whole thing to VB6 projects and maitaining the packages entirely in code. Does anyone know of any caveats in going this route? What is the general consensus among the DTS gurus on maintenance of large/complex DTS pkgs, with performance being an important factor? Here's a summary of issues I can think of: Advantages of maintaining in SQL Server: . Visual interface . Saving of layout . Ease of use . Easy to deploy Disadvantages of SQL Server/ Advantages of maintaining as VB6 code: . Source code comparison across versions . Flexibility (SQL and other common parameters can be changed easily and at runtime) . More powerful(??) . Easier Debugging . Easier maintenance - By this I mean that we can see all SQL queries, table names etc in a single file, without having to open and close all those individual dialog boxes. Are there any other considerations I need to think about? Thanks for your input, Chumma Dede |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hi, We have several large and complex DTS packages for converting from OLTP to Star schema, and maintaining them on SQL server is becoming quite cumbersome. Additionaly, we have to change the server/db names and other parameters for different client installations and we're currently doing this using INI files. We have multiple developers working on the same set of pkgs and, needless to say, version control is a nightmare. I'm now thinking about migrating the whole thing to VB6 projects and maitaining the packages entirely in code. Does anyone know of any caveats in going this route? What is the general consensus among the DTS gurus on maintenance of large/complex DTS pkgs, with performance being an important factor? Here's a summary of issues I can think of: Advantages of maintaining in SQL Server: .. Visual interface .. Saving of layout .. Ease of use .. Easy to deploy Disadvantages of SQL Server/ Advantages of maintaining as VB6 code: .. Source code comparison across versions .. Flexibility (SQL and other common parameters can be changed easily and at runtime) .. More powerful(??) .. Easier Debugging .. Easier maintenance - By this I mean that we can see all SQL queries, table names etc in a single file, without having to open and close all those individual dialog boxes. Are there any other considerations I need to think about? Thanks for your input, Chumma Dede |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hi, We have several large and complex DTS packages for converting from OLTP to Star schema, and maintaining them on SQL server is becoming quite cumbersome. Additionaly, we have to change the server/db names and other parameters for different client installations and we're currently doing this using INI files. We have multiple developers working on the same set of pkgs and, needless to say, version control is a nightmare. I'm now thinking about migrating the whole thing to VB6 projects and maitaining the packages entirely in code. Does anyone know of any caveats in going this route? What is the general consensus among the DTS gurus on maintenance of large/complex DTS pkgs, with performance being an important factor? Here's a summary of issues I can think of: Advantages of maintaining in SQL Server: .. Visual interface .. Saving of layout .. Ease of use .. Easy to deploy Disadvantages of SQL Server/ Advantages of maintaining as VB6 code: .. Source code comparison across versions .. Flexibility (SQL and other common parameters can be changed easily and at runtime) .. More powerful(??) .. Easier Debugging .. Easier maintenance - By this I mean that we can see all SQL queries, table names etc in a single file, without having to open and close all those individual dialog boxes. Are there any other considerations I need to think about? Thanks for your input, Chumma Dede |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |