My colleague and I are seeing different code generated for the same job. I open a job on my Win7 machine using DIS version 4.21, and open a join transform to view the code. Right at the end of the join I see the following: %global etls_sql_pushDown; %let etls_sql_pushDown = &sys_sql_ip_all; %rcSet(&sqlrc); %macro etls_completeTarget();    /*---- Create the integrity constraints for a table  ----*/    %put %str(NOTE: Creating integrity constraints ...);    proc datasets library=work nolist;       modify Note_0;          ic create not null (BI_Row_Effective_Date);          ic create not null (Note_Id);          ic create not null (Account_Id);          ic create not null (Created_By_User_Id);          ic create not null (Updated_By_User_Id);          ic create not null (BI_Row_Deleted_Ind);          ic create not null (Security_Type_Desc);          ic create not null (Note_Topic_Desc);    quit;       %rcSet(&syserr);    %mend etls_completeTarget; %etls_completeTarget; My colleague opens the job on her machine (same version of DIS as far as we can tell), and the code for that join finishes without the etls_completeTarget macro definition, like so: %global etls_sql_pushDown; %let etls_sql_pushDown = &sys_sql_ip_all; %rcSet(&sqlrc); Does anyone know any reason for the difference we're seeing? Given the size of the (temporary) table being created here there is potentially quite a large performance penalty to be paid for what seems to be an unnecessary step. When viewed through the diagram, the join looks identical. ... View more