what is the best way to truncate source table after job succeed, source table was in different server from target tables.
thanks
What is the best way to truncate source table.
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
-
- Participant
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:30 am
Either include another stage after the target stage, or make use of Afterjob Subroutine with the command line options for the database.
But you can mention the edition of the Datastage, to get more appropriate answers.
But you can mention the edition of the Datastage, to get more appropriate answers.
Impossible doesn't mean 'it is not possible' actually means... 'NOBODY HAS DONE IT SO FAR'
-
- Premium Member
- Posts: 1255
- Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:54 am
- Location: United States of America
I'm wondering the reason behind that suggestion.DSguru2B wrote: Keep them seperate.
Any specific reason? Why not do it in a single/same job?
Whale.
Anything that won't sell, I don't want to invent. Its sale is proof of utility, and utility is success.
Author: Thomas A. Edison 1847-1931, American Inventor, Entrepreneur, Founder of GE
Author: Thomas A. Edison 1847-1931, American Inventor, Entrepreneur, Founder of GE
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
One possible reason is looking ahead to the day when/if it's converted to a parallel job, in which it is not possible to do it in the same job.
Another reason is philosophical - the original requirement specified "after" - having separate jobs makes it easy to make this "after" relationship obvious in a job sequence.
Another reason is philosophical - the original requirement specified "after" - having separate jobs makes it easy to make this "after" relationship obvious in a job sequence.
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.