Architecting, installing and maintaining your SAS environment

One of the first discussions!

Reply
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 17

One of the first discussions!

I find it interesting to be one of the first discussions to be posted underneath this area!  I feel so special!

I am a novice system administrator and have been working on and soaking up the SAS world for the past 3 months.  I've had the chance to do several 9.2 installs on the server side, and client side of SAS BI technologies.  I'm learning more and more about configuring and deploying SAS out of the box, and helping it to fit into our proprietary environment here.

I did have something to discuss and bring up here, in regards to deploying SAS 9.2 side by side with a 9.1.3 on the same server.

We have a development environment and are currently finishing up the migration from 9.1.3 to 9.2.  There have been lots of modifications and changes that had to be made, and replicated from the 9.1.3 to the 9.2.

One concern I have noticed today, is that the 9.2 environment, did not have the SAS/CONNECT component "installed".  I've read up on the functions of SAS/CONNCET, and the Connect spawner server, and have not determined if it is a vital component to our environment here.  We have many different test/stage/development/production "sandboxes" and I have noticed that all of them generally have the SAS/Connect server setup.

When depolying SAS 9.2, on the same box as 9.1.3, could there have been conflicts with having them on the same box?

Does it hurt to not have (or to have) the SAS/Connect server setup in Management Console, even if it's full functions are not being utilized? (or is it a needed core component?)

I have noticed performance issues with logging onto the SAS 9.2 server, and the refreshing of libraries are considerably slower than in the 9.1.3 environment.

Anyone recommend some default settings that could affect log-in performance, and library performance issues for SAS 9.2?

Would love to get some input and discussions going on best practices to SAS Deployment.

Look forward to discussing!

SAS Employee
Posts: 33

One of the first discussions!

Hi. Thanks for blazing the trail and welcome! I'll respond to your SAS/CONNECT question. SAS/CONNECT is one of those SAS Foundation products that for planning orders gets *installed* if it is in your SID (license) file. However, whether or not the Connect Server is *configured* depends on whether or not it is in your plan file. If you believe SAS/CONNECT is in your SID then you can determine if it's installed by creating and viewing a registry report. Just follow this note, http://support.sas.com/kb/35/968.html. If you find it to be installed, but do not see it under Server Manager in SAS Managment Console then that would mean Connect Server was not listed in the plan file you referenced during deployment, meaning it is not configured.

As to whether or not this is an issue, well, that would depend on whether or not your users want to run jobs on your backend server from a PC or other SAS session. If they do then you'd want to have a Connect Server (and Spawner) defined in metadata. Naturally, CONNECT would have to be installed before that could happen. It is not a core component, however.

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 17

One of the first discussions!

After checking the DeploymentRegistry.html, I did find that it was installed, or included inthe SID file.  The plan file selected must have been the issue then.

To continue on though, most of our SAS users are connecting to this UNIX based machine from PCs.  The saswork directory (where temporary EG projects are being stored) indicates that the jobs are being run on the server correct?  The gathering and manipulation of data is all taking place on the server I'd hope.  Can you think of any issues with setting up the Connect Server and Spawner within metadata in relation to having a 9.1.3 server on the same machine?  I'm sure having different ports than the 9.1.3 would be all that is needed, but figured I'd ask the question anyways.

So in a nut shell, I do believe we want users to run jobs on the server (is this considered the backend of the server?)

I might play with this more over the weekend and test.

Sorry for the elementry questions in advance, I will reiterate that I am in "training" :-)

Super Contributor
Posts: 408

One of the first discussions!

Can you give us some more detail on the libraries? Eg what type are they (SAS, dbms, ..)?

Be aware that the METAAUTOINIT option is now default for 9.2 and 9.3. This option impacts the way libraries are assigned when a SAS server starts up. So check what you had in 9.1.3.

I wish you all the best in your new role as SAS admin.

Regards Jan.

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 17

One of the first discussions!

I think we have just about every databses within our orginization.  In regards to SAS, most of them are DB2 or SAS.

I am not aware of the METAAUTOINIT option.  Looking into this right now.

Thanks

Contributor
Posts: 43

One of the first discussions!

Hi Robbie,

You mentioned installing 9.2 on the same server as you have an existing 9.1 BI server running.  I did that myself when I upgraded last year.  The key point is that you must define completely different ports for your second instance.  If you use the same port numbers that may explain why the second SAS/CONNECT spawner didn't get configured properly.

I'm facing the same issue as I prepare to upgrade from 9.2 to 9.3.  I'm in the "planning" stage right now and will nedd to do a lot of research on how to do the upgrade.  One of my concerns will be copying the metadata to the new environment.  I hope I don't have to redefine things all over again.

Good luck!

Bob

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 17

One of the first discussions!

Yea, the gentleman that installed the SAS 9.2 right before I got here mentioned that he had to redo the ports #s for this setup.  It is nice using the Lev1 Lev2 options within the SAS 9.2 install now.  I'm going to add the Connect Server and Spawner this evening or weekend and see if it helps on some performance issues.

Ask a Question
Discussion stats
  • 6 replies
  • 656 views
  • 0 likes
  • 4 in conversation