Why Upgrade to SAS 9.2 for UNIX ETL processing?

[JMarkW]

I'm trying to make a case for upgrading from Version 9.1.3 on Solaris 64 to Version 9.2. SAS is mainly used for ETL processing.

The upgrade documentation I have seen is mainly advertising PC SAS type reporting functions which are not important where I'm currently working.

Does anybody know of a technical reasons for upgrading to 9.2. Examples would be bug fixes or processing speed on Solaris improvements.
The only two I know know are:
1. Fix a bug in LIBNAME XML processing error handling that exists in 9.1.3
2. Fix a bug with noquotelenmax option handling in 9.1.3

[Peter_C]

have a look at SCAPROC
it analyses running sas programs
and can provide a lot of detail information
It provides the information for the DI Studio Code Importer

[JMarkW]

SCAPROC looks like it could come in handy when debugging large macro language jobs.

I'll need to find something more concrete to impress my clients. Something that will improve performance would be nice. I'm rewriting their ETL's for efficiency. I've got the SAS ETL times down to compare favorably with straight C code ETL's. Anything that 9.2 has that could improve speed more would make a business case for upgrade easier.

[Patrick]

Hi

In case you are using SAS DI Studio for developing these ETLs then I can only recommend to upgrade as soon as possible.

The new SAS DIS 4x (which needs SAS9.2) is a huge improvement over the v3x versions for SAS9.1.

The DIS 4x version allows a much better and controlled way to develop and unit test flows. All transformations have been improved (i.e. the SCD2 loader allows now mixed SCD1 and SCD2 loading, or permanent storing of xref tables, all transformation have an option for pre- and postcode (huge reduction of user written code nodes), all transformations allow subsetting of data, and and and and...).

Development and Unit testing with DIS 4x is so much more efficient than with 3x that this alone easily justifies an upgrade to SAS 9.2

After beeing spoiled with the DIS 4x version I'm not sure if I still would accept project work where I have to use a 3x version.

Cheers
Patrick

[JMarkW]

My current client does not use DI Studio. It looks like a good reason to upgrade for those who do.