Difference between ODBC and Netezza engine











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












I am loading SAS tables into Netezza and I am using a libname with the ODBC connection to connect to netezza like this:



libname myConnection odbc noprompt="server=xxxx; DRIVER={NetezzaSQL}; port=xxxx;database=xxxx; username=xxxx;password=xxxx;";


I do it with SAS/Access Interface to ODBC because I do not have SAS/Access Interface to Netezza.



Are there any disadvantages of using ODBC engine over the Netezza engine?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    this is for oracle but will make sense for netezza too. support.sas.com/kb/31/648.html. there might be slight differences about which I will not be too oncerned
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:04












  • @Kiran it states the types of things you can do such as using the bulkload option, but this option already exists with SAS/ACCESS interface to ODBC
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:07










  • it is just as example, but i mean to say there may be minor differences about which you may not be too worried
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:09










  • @Kiran in this article: ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/… where he talks about ODBC it states why SAS/ACCESS to Netezza would be best. Technically all I want to do is load data into Netezza. So would Netezza engine instead of ODBC cause for better performance in loading big data?
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:16















up vote
0
down vote

favorite












I am loading SAS tables into Netezza and I am using a libname with the ODBC connection to connect to netezza like this:



libname myConnection odbc noprompt="server=xxxx; DRIVER={NetezzaSQL}; port=xxxx;database=xxxx; username=xxxx;password=xxxx;";


I do it with SAS/Access Interface to ODBC because I do not have SAS/Access Interface to Netezza.



Are there any disadvantages of using ODBC engine over the Netezza engine?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    this is for oracle but will make sense for netezza too. support.sas.com/kb/31/648.html. there might be slight differences about which I will not be too oncerned
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:04












  • @Kiran it states the types of things you can do such as using the bulkload option, but this option already exists with SAS/ACCESS interface to ODBC
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:07










  • it is just as example, but i mean to say there may be minor differences about which you may not be too worried
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:09










  • @Kiran in this article: ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/… where he talks about ODBC it states why SAS/ACCESS to Netezza would be best. Technically all I want to do is load data into Netezza. So would Netezza engine instead of ODBC cause for better performance in loading big data?
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:16













up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











I am loading SAS tables into Netezza and I am using a libname with the ODBC connection to connect to netezza like this:



libname myConnection odbc noprompt="server=xxxx; DRIVER={NetezzaSQL}; port=xxxx;database=xxxx; username=xxxx;password=xxxx;";


I do it with SAS/Access Interface to ODBC because I do not have SAS/Access Interface to Netezza.



Are there any disadvantages of using ODBC engine over the Netezza engine?










share|improve this question













I am loading SAS tables into Netezza and I am using a libname with the ODBC connection to connect to netezza like this:



libname myConnection odbc noprompt="server=xxxx; DRIVER={NetezzaSQL}; port=xxxx;database=xxxx; username=xxxx;password=xxxx;";


I do it with SAS/Access Interface to ODBC because I do not have SAS/Access Interface to Netezza.



Are there any disadvantages of using ODBC engine over the Netezza engine?







sas odbc netezza






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Nov 9 at 14:56









jim

10611




10611








  • 1




    this is for oracle but will make sense for netezza too. support.sas.com/kb/31/648.html. there might be slight differences about which I will not be too oncerned
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:04












  • @Kiran it states the types of things you can do such as using the bulkload option, but this option already exists with SAS/ACCESS interface to ODBC
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:07










  • it is just as example, but i mean to say there may be minor differences about which you may not be too worried
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:09










  • @Kiran in this article: ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/… where he talks about ODBC it states why SAS/ACCESS to Netezza would be best. Technically all I want to do is load data into Netezza. So would Netezza engine instead of ODBC cause for better performance in loading big data?
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:16














  • 1




    this is for oracle but will make sense for netezza too. support.sas.com/kb/31/648.html. there might be slight differences about which I will not be too oncerned
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:04












  • @Kiran it states the types of things you can do such as using the bulkload option, but this option already exists with SAS/ACCESS interface to ODBC
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:07










  • it is just as example, but i mean to say there may be minor differences about which you may not be too worried
    – Kiran
    Nov 9 at 15:09










  • @Kiran in this article: ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/… where he talks about ODBC it states why SAS/ACCESS to Netezza would be best. Technically all I want to do is load data into Netezza. So would Netezza engine instead of ODBC cause for better performance in loading big data?
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:16








1




1




this is for oracle but will make sense for netezza too. support.sas.com/kb/31/648.html. there might be slight differences about which I will not be too oncerned
– Kiran
Nov 9 at 15:04






this is for oracle but will make sense for netezza too. support.sas.com/kb/31/648.html. there might be slight differences about which I will not be too oncerned
– Kiran
Nov 9 at 15:04














@Kiran it states the types of things you can do such as using the bulkload option, but this option already exists with SAS/ACCESS interface to ODBC
– jim
Nov 9 at 15:07




@Kiran it states the types of things you can do such as using the bulkload option, but this option already exists with SAS/ACCESS interface to ODBC
– jim
Nov 9 at 15:07












it is just as example, but i mean to say there may be minor differences about which you may not be too worried
– Kiran
Nov 9 at 15:09




it is just as example, but i mean to say there may be minor differences about which you may not be too worried
– Kiran
Nov 9 at 15:09












@Kiran in this article: ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/… where he talks about ODBC it states why SAS/ACCESS to Netezza would be best. Technically all I want to do is load data into Netezza. So would Netezza engine instead of ODBC cause for better performance in loading big data?
– jim
Nov 9 at 15:16




@Kiran in this article: ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/… where he talks about ODBC it states why SAS/ACCESS to Netezza would be best. Technically all I want to do is load data into Netezza. So would Netezza engine instead of ODBC cause for better performance in loading big data?
– jim
Nov 9 at 15:16












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










it depends.
see the below link for the paper on SAS connections in relation to netezza
sas.com/partners/directory/ibm/NetezzaDWAppliances-withSAS.pdf



In this paper, it describes SAS/Access for ODBC is also available, but provides lower performance as it does not ‘push down’ as much of the SAS code or PROC SQL as SQL to Netezza. SAS/Access for ODBC does not support SAS 9.3 in-database processing.



when you are writing an implicit pass through or a datastep the code is not sent to database for processing in 9.3 and about 9.4 i do not have idea.



So performance will be impacted when you are using implicit pass through and looking for in-database processing



If you are just moving your data from SAS to Netezza, impact may not be significant but I have not tested both of them separately so I cannot tell for sure






share|improve this answer























  • thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:37










  • In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:37










  • In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:38













Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53228123%2fdifference-between-odbc-and-netezza-engine%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
1
down vote



accepted










it depends.
see the below link for the paper on SAS connections in relation to netezza
sas.com/partners/directory/ibm/NetezzaDWAppliances-withSAS.pdf



In this paper, it describes SAS/Access for ODBC is also available, but provides lower performance as it does not ‘push down’ as much of the SAS code or PROC SQL as SQL to Netezza. SAS/Access for ODBC does not support SAS 9.3 in-database processing.



when you are writing an implicit pass through or a datastep the code is not sent to database for processing in 9.3 and about 9.4 i do not have idea.



So performance will be impacted when you are using implicit pass through and looking for in-database processing



If you are just moving your data from SAS to Netezza, impact may not be significant but I have not tested both of them separately so I cannot tell for sure






share|improve this answer























  • thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:37










  • In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:37










  • In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:38

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










it depends.
see the below link for the paper on SAS connections in relation to netezza
sas.com/partners/directory/ibm/NetezzaDWAppliances-withSAS.pdf



In this paper, it describes SAS/Access for ODBC is also available, but provides lower performance as it does not ‘push down’ as much of the SAS code or PROC SQL as SQL to Netezza. SAS/Access for ODBC does not support SAS 9.3 in-database processing.



when you are writing an implicit pass through or a datastep the code is not sent to database for processing in 9.3 and about 9.4 i do not have idea.



So performance will be impacted when you are using implicit pass through and looking for in-database processing



If you are just moving your data from SAS to Netezza, impact may not be significant but I have not tested both of them separately so I cannot tell for sure






share|improve this answer























  • thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:37










  • In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:37










  • In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:38















up vote
1
down vote



accepted







up vote
1
down vote



accepted






it depends.
see the below link for the paper on SAS connections in relation to netezza
sas.com/partners/directory/ibm/NetezzaDWAppliances-withSAS.pdf



In this paper, it describes SAS/Access for ODBC is also available, but provides lower performance as it does not ‘push down’ as much of the SAS code or PROC SQL as SQL to Netezza. SAS/Access for ODBC does not support SAS 9.3 in-database processing.



when you are writing an implicit pass through or a datastep the code is not sent to database for processing in 9.3 and about 9.4 i do not have idea.



So performance will be impacted when you are using implicit pass through and looking for in-database processing



If you are just moving your data from SAS to Netezza, impact may not be significant but I have not tested both of them separately so I cannot tell for sure






share|improve this answer














it depends.
see the below link for the paper on SAS connections in relation to netezza
sas.com/partners/directory/ibm/NetezzaDWAppliances-withSAS.pdf



In this paper, it describes SAS/Access for ODBC is also available, but provides lower performance as it does not ‘push down’ as much of the SAS code or PROC SQL as SQL to Netezza. SAS/Access for ODBC does not support SAS 9.3 in-database processing.



when you are writing an implicit pass through or a datastep the code is not sent to database for processing in 9.3 and about 9.4 i do not have idea.



So performance will be impacted when you are using implicit pass through and looking for in-database processing



If you are just moving your data from SAS to Netezza, impact may not be significant but I have not tested both of them separately so I cannot tell for sure







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Nov 9 at 15:25

























answered Nov 9 at 15:17









Kiran

2,2872819




2,2872819












  • thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:37










  • In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:37










  • In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:38




















  • thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
    – jim
    Nov 9 at 15:37










  • In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:37










  • In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
    – Lars G Olsen
    Nov 10 at 8:38


















thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
– jim
Nov 9 at 15:37




thanks for this info. The tables we are working with are 100 of millions of rows. So it might be worth it to test both ODBC and NETEZZA for performance, which is what I'll try to do. I appreciate the help!
– jim
Nov 9 at 15:37












In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
– Lars G Olsen
Nov 10 at 8:37




In my experience the push-down capabilities of the sas engine out-of-the-box is not great. It constantly opens extra connections to the database (one connection only is key to push-down) and libnames under different schemas are not always using the same connection, even if you make them all ‘global’.
– Lars G Olsen
Nov 10 at 8:37












In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
– Lars G Olsen
Nov 10 at 8:38






In short: it is almost the same amount of work to write pass through sql yourself and only use the odbc connect. Only real difference is if you use a LOT of sas formats. Please note that the Netezza connect IS using odbc under the covers, only difference when push comes is push-down.
– Lars G Olsen
Nov 10 at 8:38




















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53228123%2fdifference-between-odbc-and-netezza-engine%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Guess what letter conforming each word

Port of Spain

Run scheduled task as local user group (not BUILTIN)