DFT - Howto last execute a storedprocedure

donRiccardo

In a DataFlowTask with several OLE DB Destinations, how can I "last", before ending this DFT execute a storedProcedure

This storedprocedure is used for saving metadata (taskname, rowcounts etc) regarding this DFT and I dont want to add an ExecuteSQLTask after the DFT in the Control Flow

Regards

Riccardo

Phil Brammer

donRiccardo wrote:

In a DataFlowTask with several OLE DB Destinations, how can I "last", before ending this DFT execute a storedProcedure This storedprocedure is used for saving metadata (taskname, rowcounts etc) regarding this DFT and I dont want to add an ExecuteSQLTask after the DFT in the Control Flow Regards Riccardo

Why not The proper place for this *IS* after the data flow in the control flow.

JayH

Is there a reason you want it to be last You can't create any kind of precedence between the destinations. Seems if you've got the row count, then you've seen all the rows and you could just use an OLE DB Command.

If you're trying to get something like execution time, then you would need to put it in the control flow after the DFT.

jwelch

Why not put an Exec SQL in your OnPostExecute event for the data flow It won't show up in the main control flow, but you'll still be able to capture your info.

donRiccardo

Well I'm only collecting, Taskname, InsertedRows, UpdatedRows and DeletedRows, and not actually the execution time, then it would be more correct to have it after the DFT.

But the main reason was to NOT needing an EST after every DFT, keeping a more cleaner ControlFlow

/Richard

Phil Brammer

donRiccardo wrote:

Well I'm only collecting, Taskname, InsertedRows, UpdatedRows and DeletedRows, and not actually the execution time, then it would be more correct to have it after the DFT. But the main reason was to NOT needing an EST after every DFT, keeping a more cleaner ControlFlow /Richard

I don't get it, but to each his own. The control flow is still the proper place, in my opinion, for what it's worth. The PostExecute() method seems a bit silly to me because it's hidden from view and perhaps easy to overlook when maintaining the package.