User inserted sort...

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
prematram
Participant
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:01 am
Location: Chennai

User inserted sort...

Post by prematram »

I used a sort stage with hash partionning and after sorting the data , i used remove duplicates stage with same partition.

I am encountering the error as
"User inserted sort "LabResultMem_srt" does not fulfill the sort requirements of the downstream operator "LabResultMem_rdup"

Note:

I have not got the warning when i tried to run this job under 4 partioned nodes, But when i tried running the job with 8 node partitions , i am getting this error.


I searched under this topic,but i have not got answers in relation with no of partitions.is there any problem with no of partitions...?

No of records processed - 300 million records.
Prem R.
swapnilverma
Participant
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:27 am
Location: Mumbai

Re: User inserted sort...

Post by swapnilverma »

prematram wrote:I used a sort stage with hash partionning and after sorting the data , i used remove duplicates stage with same partition.

I am encountering the error as
"User inserted sort "LabResultMem_srt" does not fulfill the sort requirements of the downstream operator "LabResultMem_rdup"

Note:

I have not got the warning when i tried to run this job under 4 partioned nodes, But when i tried running the job with 8 node partitions , i am getting this error.


I searched under this topic,but i have not got answers in relation with no of partitions.is there any problem with no of partitions...?

No of records processed - 300 million records.

First of all why you need to use remove duplicate stage .. you can remove duplicates in sort stage it self ( by setting Allow Duplicates to FALSE)

2nd if you have used join and merge stage Set the environment variable APT_NO_SORT_INSERTION to true ...

Hope it will work !!!
Thanks
Swapnil

"Whenever you find whole world against you just turn around and Lead the world"
prematram
Participant
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:01 am
Location: Chennai

Still having one doubt

Post by prematram »

Hi,

Thanks for your response.

But same job when i tried running with config referring 4 nodes, it hasa run successfully. But the problem araised only when we tried running with config file pointing to 8 nodes.

The prevailing problem is anyway related to that...??
Prem R.
swapnilverma
Participant
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:27 am
Location: Mumbai

Re: Still having one doubt

Post by swapnilverma »

prematram wrote:Hi,

Thanks for your response.

But same job when i tried running with config referring 4 nodes, it hasa run successfully. But the problem araised only when we tried running with config file pointing to 8 nodes.

The prevailing problem is anyway related to that...??

Well.. the above warning is coming for which stage...
also provide your design in detail?
Thanks
Swapnil

"Whenever you find whole world against you just turn around and Lead the world"
jhmckeever
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:27 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by jhmckeever »

I know it's obvious but you ARE sorting and de-duping on the same keys, aren't you?
<b>John McKeever</b>
Data Migrators
<b><a href="https://www.mettleci.com">MettleCI</a> - DevOps for DataStage</b>
<a href="http://www.datamigrators.com/"><img src="https://www.datamigrators.com/assets/im ... l.png"></a>
ray.wurlod
Participant
Posts: 54607
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by ray.wurlod »

What partitioning is specified on the input (a) of the Sort stage and (b) of the Remove Duplicates stage? Are there any stages between these two?

What are your specified Sort keys? What are your specified Remove Duplicate keys?
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Post Reply