Hi,
maybe it's absolutely easy, but I could not find a solution so far.
My transformation is reading up to 5000 rows from a table in a staging area.
Then it does some transformation steps and finally it's populating the data to some tables in the warehouse schema.
It is absolutely crucial that the rows never change their order.
The select statement is following a chronological index.
I used order by and force index.
So after the Table Input step the row set is in the right order (I hope so...).
At least it is if I execute the select manually...
But I can see, that in the Insert/Update step the race has not been decided :(
Is it really necessary to sort the sorted result again in a temp file in a Sort step?
I tried to get rid of duplicate rows, but that doesn't work either. It just drops the 'wrong' rows. Means, it keeps the oldest and skips the newest.
So what is the right way to run a transaction, so that the output happens in exactly the same sequence as the input?
Or, as an alternative, that I can sort out the oldest rows?
Thanks for any help
Dieter
maybe it's absolutely easy, but I could not find a solution so far.
My transformation is reading up to 5000 rows from a table in a staging area.
Then it does some transformation steps and finally it's populating the data to some tables in the warehouse schema.
It is absolutely crucial that the rows never change their order.
The select statement is following a chronological index.
I used order by and force index.
So after the Table Input step the row set is in the right order (I hope so...).
At least it is if I execute the select manually...
But I can see, that in the Insert/Update step the race has not been decided :(
Is it really necessary to sort the sorted result again in a temp file in a Sort step?
I tried to get rid of duplicate rows, but that doesn't work either. It just drops the 'wrong' rows. Means, it keeps the oldest and skips the newest.
So what is the right way to run a transaction, so that the output happens in exactly the same sequence as the input?
Or, as an alternative, that I can sort out the oldest rows?
Thanks for any help
Dieter