f



Re: Mainframe SAS to PC located MS ACCESS database

As is so common in this language, the answer is 'it depends on what you're
trying to do'.  You can establish an odbc connection from a host job to
your SQL Server db (fairly sure it can do Access, too), but 1) your login
info is exposed in open code (and while you can do some things to hide it,
it's still out there (it's not encrypted)), and 2) if you're transmitting
large volumes of data, odbc is not very efficient.

If you're only going after a few rows of data, and you don't mind a
potential exposure of your credentials, then go the odbc route (this also
assumes that you don't have to jump through too many hoops to connect to a
PC/server--some shops have restricted access to only machines on the
network that they have control over--in which case you either need to move
your data onto one of those machines, or have your machine put on the
mapped/approved list).  If you want to move large volumes, or run a complex
join/stored procedure on the server side (or can't easily gain access to
your server from the host), then you might do a push up to the host instead
of a pull.  Create an export file that can be ftp'd, and then go fetch it
with your MVS batch job.

If you give us a few more details, maybe we can give you a more precise
answer.

CH


On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:36:11 -0500, Davis Kriss P <kpdavis@ILSTU.EDU> wrote:

>Dear SAS-L members,
>
>Is there a "SAS" or "other" set of products that would allow me to run a
>batch job in MVS/OS390 SAS, connect through the network, and actually
>read an MS ACCESS database located on a PC or FTP site?
>
>I have been searching the SAS-L archives but did not find a recent
>discussion on the options to accomplish this connection.  I know it has
>not been possible in older versions of SAS and its connection products,
>but maybe there is something new I am not aware of.  It would not have
>to be an "ALL SAS" solution if there would be some mainframe software
>that could generally read data in this manner.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Kriss Davis
>Ill State Univ
>kpdavis@ilstu.edu
0
10/7/2005 9:38:24 PM
comp.soft-sys.sas 142827 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

0 Replies
676 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 55

Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Mainframe SAS to PC located MS ACCESS database
Dear SAS-L members, Is there a "SAS" or "other" set of products that would allow me to run a batch job in MVS/OS390 SAS, connect through the network, and actually read an MS ACCESS database located on a PC or FTP site? I have been searching the SAS-L archives but did not find a recent discussion on the options to accomplish this connection. I know it has not been possible in older versions of SAS and its connection products, but maybe there is something new I am not aware of. It would not have to be an "ALL SAS" solution if there would be some mainframe softwa...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS)
Alan, Your renaming of the thread is appropriate, given the path the discussion in it has taken. The irony of it is in the implied statement (expressed as a question). To that end, let me state straight that in my opinion, any talk of the mainframe demise is utter nonsense. Reason: RAS. Manframe RAS figures, which non-mainframe servers has never even started to approach, will not be shaken by any PC teraflops. Mainframes are not gaming machine, and their computing power far exceeds anything any mainframe-specific application can throw at them. We have been through the mainframe death before,...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #27
> From: Alan Churchill > > But Ron, not all companies do IT chargeback. A company can > allocate costs in various ways and doesn't necessarily have > to charge per use for computing. > > I think chargeback may be one of the big reasons for the rise > of departmental computing. As long as we are talking six figure numbers, the accountants may agree that that the long division may not be worth it. However, once you have eight figure costs then I think the juice is worth the sqeeze and the hand-wringing of charge-back is a necessary and welcome evil. > Ron Fehd ...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #16
At 02:04 29/09/06 -0400, Dorfman, Paul wrote (in small part): >The real problem with your vision, in my opinion, is that it directly >contradicts one of the fundamental laws of technology regardless of the >particular area, namely: In order to achieve a certain output, one large >unit is always more efficient than a number of lesser units working in >parallel. [lots of pretty valid examples snipped].... Hi Paul. I guess that a lot depends upon what one means by 'efficiency' and whether one takes practical issues and reliability into consideration. Due to physical lim...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #26
But Ron, not all companies do IT chargeback. A company can allocate costs in various ways and doesn't necessarily have to charge per use for computing. I think chargeback may be one of the big reasons for the rise of departmental computing. Alan Alan Churchill Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" www.savian.net -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCPHI) Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 1:29 PM To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainf...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #22
Toby, Thanks for sending this along. I thought I would share with the list since it has numbers, contradicts some things that have been said on this thread, and reinforces others. Personally, I think it is a meaningless move on their part but they have to do what they have to do: Alan ========================================================================== IBM simplifies mainframe software By BRIAN BERGSTEIN, AP Technology Writer IBM Corp. hopes a new effort to simplify programming for mainframe computers helps keep those warhorses competitive. Mainframes are sophisticated computers t...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #21
Paul, I did not mean to suggest that you discovered/invented the law; I only meant that you suggested its applicability to SAS-L in terms of the subject line and that I thought there was reason to question its applicability. I would consider the "tools of war" as falling well within the bounds of technology. As for the biological examples, I do not know how in these times to exclude biology from technology. While I would never endorse an "Intelligent Design" view of evolution, I do think that Darwin's principle has lead to far more efficient designs than human techn...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #25
> From: ben.powell > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/26/ibm_mainframe_z9/ > > Ugly figures for IBM from 2005, grand plans, yes. any serious attempt to provide a replacement for mainframe will have to deal with -- at the very least -- chargeback. Unless a company can realistically (re)distribute costs to divisions no one will buy a replacement for BigIron. Ron Fehd a previous MVS maven CDC Atlanta GA USA RJF2 at cdc dot gov ...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #30
But Charles, the largest computing happening today is distributed. Google has far more than 10,000 users and a billion transactions a sec. Google obviously doesn't do chargeback nor do they charge users for their services. I agree that some of the platforms may look somewhat like terminals or a quasi-mainframe but they aren't. The UIs are different, the delivery mechanisms are different, and the experience is different. At a high level there may be similarities but they end there. A 3270 pretty much never changed. Blame IBM for taking an IT centric approach rather than a business-ce...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #4
This is slightly off topic for SAS-L but ... the same arguments that pertain to increases in performance in PC architecture also apply to MF. MF product cycle is longer but new technology is always available in new machines and with a guarantee of a certain level (triple engineered, high cost, longevity tested) of system stability. "Death of MF" has been proven to be conclusively wrong. I think the most we might see is "Falling sales for MF over next 3 years", then what? We won't see "50% of MF customers aim to replace MF with commodity computing power by 2010&qu...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #9
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:00:18 -0600, Alan Churchill <SASL001@SAVIAN.NET> wrote: >Richard, > >You got me...on both counts. > >Alan > >Alan Churchill >Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" >www.savian.net > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Richard >A. DeVenezia >Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 6:03 AM >To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >Subject: Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) > >Alan Churchill wrote: >> Paul, >...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #23
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/26/ibm_mainframe_z9/ Ugly figures for IBM from 2005, Rgds. ...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #6
Richard, You got me...on both counts. Alan Alan Churchill Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" www.savian.net -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Richard A. DeVenezia Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 6:03 AM To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) Alan Churchill wrote: > Paul, > > Just some more food for thought: .... > Massive schools of minnows it seems vs the whale. Who is to say you can't have a school of whales? In the analogy...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #10
Yeah, but that was my original point. Clusters and grids to serve web services. Big minnow farms... Alan Alan Churchill Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" www.savian.net -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Chang Chung Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 10:00 AM To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:00:18 -0600, Alan Churchill <SASL001@SAVIAN.NET> wrote: >Richard, > >You got me...on both counts. > >Alan &...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #5
With an 80 core PC, I think it could start to host a lot of people. As programmers start to assume no limit on power, the applications will get much more robust and, I think, more graphically intensive. That requires a lot more horse-power than a 3270 application. Alan Alan Churchill Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" www.savian.net -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of RolandRB Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 7:36 AM To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainfra...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #24
Looks like the point is being made. I was cleaning out all of my books today. I figure I will toss the REXX, JCL, and MVS Perf Mgmt books (I may keep the latter though). Perhaps I should donate them to a library and scare the young programmers out there with JCL. Alan Alan Churchill Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" www.savian.net -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of ben.powell@CLA.CO.UK Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:01 PM To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. ...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #15
Well assuming at least one of us has a five year memory then the bet is accepted :-) -----Original Message----- From: Alan Churchill [mailto:SASL001@savian.net] Sent: 29 September 2006 02:59 To: Ben Powell; SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: RE: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) Ben, Good point. Most companies, however, can't afford Maybachs for the squids. Those are mainly an exec option. I think you are making my point.... I'll tell you what. If mainframe units sold increase over the next 5 years from now, next time I am in the UK I'll buy you a pint. Other...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #20
Ian, I am the one who suggested it no more than I am the one who suggested any other law I did not discover. And I by no means meant to expand a law of technology (of which I explicitly stated it is, and herein lies the constraint) on anything out of the realm within which it applies. Whether Google should or should not switch to mainframe(s) as their data pile up is a legitimate question. My guess is they will not - not because it is principally impossible or mainframes cannot handle their loads, but because they have spent so much for their current technology that departing from it at this ...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #40
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/biztech/10/30/reviving.mainframes.ap/index.html On 10/23/06, ben.powell@cla.co.uk <ben.powell@cla.co.uk> wrote: > > So mainframe will be replaced with distributed/generic at the rate by > which > computing TCO reduces relative to increasing application demand? If MSoft > Office 2020 runs to 100 terabytes then we may still need mainframe... > > Rgds. > > On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:40:38 -0400, Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCPHI) > <rjf2@CDC.GOV> wrote: > > >> From: Alan Churchill > >> > >> But Ron, n...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #31
Ron, Let me step back somewhat and agree on principle but change it up a bit. As we move toward the grid, early models, IMO, will emerge where users are charged for services upfront. Amazon S3 is such a model where you can buy all the computing power needed. However, as computing power rises at an alarming rate the costs will plummet similar to what we have seen in telco costs. Computing will go toward 0. At that point, other models will need to be figured out. Intel announcing a teraflop PC chip, hard disks plummeting in price, memory doing likewise all leads to massive computing power. W...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #28
Ron: Chargeback programs founder on a fundamental economic fallacy: that replacement costs have to be distributed to users. In fact, costs of mainframes or anything else are 'sunk'; that is, they have been paid or have to be paid whether or not they provide benefits to operating divisions. Chargebacks do not generate revenues or benefits; they merely reallocate funding from this budget to that budget. If someone blows up an uninsured mainframe, no chargeback, but the acquisition costs don't go away. While mainframes still ruled computing I spent a year leading a team that develope...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #8
"If you're the VP of an IT shop and to get a good MVS guy will costs you $200K/yr because they're in short supply" Yes but this is only a problem if the business value of the installation is comparable to that which you could support with a 3 x86 guys at $65k. Per head MF support may cost more but generally speaking the total staff cost as a proportion of the value of the hardware and the business it supports - and this is far less subject to PC-style depreciation - is much lower than you would get for PC. You don't hire a two bit mechanic to service a Maybach. -----Ori...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #13
Ben, Good point. Most companies, however, can't afford Maybachs for the squids. Those are mainly an exec option. I think you are making my point.... I'll tell you what. If mainframe units sold increase over the next 5 years from now, next time I am in the UK I'll buy you a pint. Otherwise, I'll take mine but in Brighton on the pier. Sound fair? Alan Alan Churchill Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies" www.savian.net -----Original Message----- From: Ben Powell [mailto:Ben.powell@cla.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 8:36 AM To: Alan Churchil...

Re: Death of the Mainframe? (was PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS) #17
Summary: ? #iw-value=0 Paul, You suggested a fundamental law. In order to achieve a certain output, one large unit is always more efficient than a number of lesser units working in parallel. So we should be able to deduce some facts form this law. 1) Google will be out of business shortly after some bright person decides to do the same thing with a powerful mainframe. 2) It makes no sense to fight wars with small weapons, since big weapons are more efficient. 3) Ants and all other social animals are an evolutionary impossible sort of animal, since inefficiency ...

Web resources about - Re: Mainframe SAS to PC located MS ACCESS database - comp.soft-sys.sas

Mainframe computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
) are computers used primarily by corporate and governmental organizations for critical applications, bulk data processing such as census , industry ...

IBM's New z13 Mainframe Designed to Handle Billions of Transactions for the Mobile Economy - Flickr ...
At IBM's manufacturing facility in Poughkeepsie, NY, software developer Moses Vaughan tests a mobile app that is running on IBM's new z13 mainframe, ...

The Raised Floor - IBM Mainframe Computer Ops in the 1980s - YouTube
A photo album documenting the roles of, and equipment run by printer operators, console operators, tape librarians and IMS MTOs working with ...

IBM: The PC is the new mainframe - Apple, Configuration / maintenance, Data Center, hardware systems ...
"The PC is dead!" We've heard that message a lot since the birth of Apple's iPad, but when one of the creators of IBM's first PC added his voice ...

Who says the mainframe is dead?
Who says the mainframe is dead?

The IBM mainframe: Golden oldie or modern marvel?
While dissenters continue to challenge the validity of the mainframe, the technology keeps on proving its worth.

Mammoth mainframe computers far from extinct
Mammoth mainframe computers far from extinct

Nissan Leaf gives mainframe a new M2M kick along
Nissan is revisiting an old technology to cater for a brand new one.

IBM: Insane in the Mainframe …
The mainframe business may be slowly dying off, but it’s nowhere near dead yet. Even as the enterprise market’s affinity for less-expensive ...

50 years ago, IBM created mainframe that helped send men to the Moon
An IBM System/360. IBM 50 years ago today, IBM unveiled the System/360 mainframe, a groundbreaking computer that allowed new levels of compatibility ...

Resources last updated: 3/3/2016 6:18:18 PM