Aaron,
Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.

I do use linked servers and scripts for my daily import scripts in my SPs,
but I can understand how it makes it so much easier to build these kinds of
things in the point and click DTS interface; especially for things like the
excel to oracle use case you mention.
I had also forgotten about the VB code that the DTSs allow.  that can be
handy in some cases.


On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Aaron Rouse <[email protected]> wrote:

> We typically used DTS to migrate data between database servers that could
> not talk directly to one another and quite often one of those databases
> would not be SQL Server.  Part of the migration would be some form of data
> manipulation but not always.  Really simple stuff and was really easy to get
> done in DTS and still faily easy with SISS when going between two SQL
> Servers.  When I first got here they used DTS a lot, I believe with a ton of
> VB code and who knows what else, that was all in a data warehouse that I had
> nothing to do but shared an office with one of their programmers so heard a
> lot about it.  I have used DTS for quick and dirty imports of data in the
> past, it is unbelievably simple to do and nice when you can just get
> something like an Excel file into Oracle with very little invested time or
> effort and with a pre-existing(on the machine) tool.
>
> Now days the only thing I have to use SISS for is to migrate data from our
> staging server to the production.  Which could be done with an SP if the
> users were allowed the proper permissions.  I doubt any DTS packages I have
> written in the past are still online here, most everything has been migrated
> to Oracle or retired.
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Ken Auenson, II <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> So, I have not yet been exposed to SISS in SQL Server 2005, but I am
>> maintaining a few DBs that are SQL Server 2000 that had a lot of DTS
>> packages.
>> At one point, I re-wrote most of them to be straight stored procedures.
>> I find this to be a lot easier to maintain and a lot easier to actual work
>> with.
>> What tasks and added power to DTS and/or SISS have that you cannot do in
>> straight stored procedures?
>> In other words, what features/benifits am I missing out on?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ken
>>
>>   On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Aaron Rouse <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>   I am talking about the cost of the software itself not the people who
>>> manage it.  We pay the same amount of money for either and actually the same
>>> people administer both flavors is why.
>>>
>>> Yes SISS is much more powerful but for those of us who do not need the
>>> added power it actually made certain tasks more cumbersome to do if using
>>> SISS instead of DTS.
>>>
>>>    On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:51 AM, Robert L. Stewart <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cost of ownership and cost of both development DBAs (which I am) and
>>>> production DBAs is a lot lower with SQL Server than Oracle. Oracle
>>>> DBAs tend to specialize in certain things about the role. Because
>>>> of the size and complexity of it, it is pretty much impossible to
>>>> do everything in it well as a DBA. All of the Oracle "development"
>>>> DBAs that I have dealt with have been very competent with writing SQL
>>>> statements, again I think it is the specialization thing.
>>>>
>>>> The change done to DTS to make it SSIS was generally to put it into
>>>> competition with Informatica. For those of you that have not seen it,
>>>> it is a lot like the SSIS interface. SSIS is also much more powerful
>>>> than DTS ever was.
>>>>
>>>> Also, if you write the T-SQL correctly, it can be extremely versatile
>>>> for the GUI/Business layer programmer to use. For example, the update
>>>> can be written so that not all the fields need to be passed in, but
>>>> the ones that are passed in will be updated.
>>>>
>>>> For example:
>>>>
>>>> UPDATE  dbo.tbl_HSE_Causes
>>>> SET     [HSEC_HAZOP_ID] = CASE WHEN @HSEC_HAZOP_ID IS NULL THEN
>>>> [HSEC_HAZOP_ID]
>>>>            ELSE @HSEC_HAZOP_ID
>>>>         END,
>>>>     [HSEC_No] = CASE WHEN @HSEC_No IS NULL THEN [HSEC_No]
>>>>              ELSE @HSEC_No
>>>>         END,
>>>>     [HSEC_Project_ID] = CASE WHEN @HSEC_Project_ID IS NULL THEN
>>>> [HSEC_Project_ID]
>>>>              ELSE @HSEC_Project_ID
>>>>         END,
>>>>     [HSEC_Description] = CASE WHEN @HSEC_Description IS NULL THEN
>>>> [HSEC_Description]
>>>>           ELSE @HSEC_Description
>>>>         END
>>>> WHERE   HSEC_ID = @HSEC_ID
>>>>
>>>> All of the parameters are optional except the HSEC_ID in the example.
>>>>
>>>> I would be interested in reading that article. It seems that they should
>>>> be
>>>> optimizing the dynamic stuff more because of LINQ. So maybe they have in
>>>> 2008.
>>>> But, I do not know many people that are using it yet.  SPs definitely
>>>> faster in 2000 and 2005 that dynamic.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 02:32 AM 12/17/2008, you wrote:
>>>> >Date: Tues, Dec 16 2008 7:24 pm
>>>> >From: "Aaron Rouse"
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >Yeah just a shame that the price tag on Oracle and CF Enterprise(if you
>>>> want
>>>> >out of the box datadirect drivers) is rather steep for some.  We are
>>>> being
>>>> >pushed slowly towards SQL Server because MS gave a bunch of licenses
>>>> for it
>>>> >and makes the cost of Oracle all the sudden seem like a huge waste of
>>>> money
>>>> >to the higher ups.  Have to love MS's approach, make the first uses
>>>> free
>>>> >then once they are sunk in charge them a lot.
>>>>
>>>>  Robert Stewart
>>>> ProjecTools.com
>>>> 713-371-9840 X1305
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>  Aaron Rouse
>>>> http://www.happyhacker.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Aaron Rouse
>> http://www.happyhacker.com/
>>
>> >>
>>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Houston ColdFusion 
Users' Group" discussion list.
To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit http://groups.google.com/group/houcfug?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to