In one of my projects we're developing a SSIS framework. In this framework we defined a template about how a SSIS package and project should look like. We defined also structured checkpointfiles, logfiles, exportfiles and importfiles with naming conventions. Currently i'm building a SSAS cube based on the logging and auditing tables and i'll blog about this in the future.
I blogged about this in earlier post:
I blogged about this in earlier post:
- SSIS Framework (Part I)
- SSIS : indirect configuration and one configuration per connection in a configuration database.
- SSIS : Six Scenarios and a best practice for the SSIS Package Configurations.
I've adopted the naming convention of Jamie thomson and this works great. But maybe what i've done is not so good: I also used this naming convention for the connection manager. When a OLEDB datasource is used as source i named it OLE_SRC_AdventureWorks. It isn't a problem when you don't use a general configuration table in your project but when you do troubles come into town: It is possible to use a connection as a source and a destination! Really? ;-)
Therefore your naming convention for connections should be source and destination independent. Perhaps an obvious issue but it become a real issue when you store your connections in a general configuration table.
Therefore your naming convention for connections should be source and destination independent. Perhaps an obvious issue but it become a real issue when you store your connections in a general configuration table.
Greetz,
Hennie
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten