topic Re: ods excel in SAS Enterprise Guide

ods excel

DirkV — Wed, 15 Jan 2020 13:48:37 GMT

Hi,

i use this code to genearate an excel report:

ODS excel file= "&bedr.\&rapp..xlsx" style=excel

options(sheet_name="&rapp." flow="tables" ABSOLUTE_COLUMN_WIDTH ='175px,210px,126px,348px,210px,203px,91px,91px,119px,147px,126px,133px,91px,91px,91px'

absolute_row_height='20px');

proc print data=mydataset noobs LABEL;

run;

ODS excel CLOSE;

I run the code in SAS EG, it works fine. In an other sas session several options are not working, column width in pixels, style = excel and flow = "tables"

How would that be possible?

What system options could make the difference?

Regards,

Dirk

Re: ods excel

Cynthia_sas — Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:25:46 GMT

Hi:
These "sub-options" (everything in parentheses after the word options on the ODS EXCEL statement) are specific to ODS EXCEL. Those sub-options will not necessarily work in other ODS destinations. Are you sure you are using ODS EXCEL in your other sessions? If not, you should not expect the sub-options to work.

Also your other SAS sessions have to be using a version of SAS in which ODS EXCEL was production.

Finally, for STYLE=EXCEL option -- the STYLE template has to be on those other systems too.

You might want to work with Tech Support on this question because there are too many unknown reasons why your code in EG wouldn't work elsewhere.

Cynthia

Re: ods excel

Reeza — Wed, 15 Jan 2020 16:34:38 GMT

Well, I'd probably see which options weren't working and say any options related to those. In general, first check that both installations are the exact same version.

proc product_status;run; will tell you the version in the log.

Re: ods excel

DirkV — Thu, 16 Jan 2020 06:34:58 GMT

Hi Cyntia,

Thanks for your answer.

i am using the same code in the two different SAS sessions.

One is 'development', the other is 'production'.

I'm trying to find out what should be done to make sure the output is the same. One would of course assume that both environments are the same, which apparently is not.

Regards,

Dirk