LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (April 2002, week 3)Back to main SAS-L pageJoin or leave SAS-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Fri, 19 Apr 2002 12:43:19 -0700
Reply-To:     Cassell.David@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "David L. Cassell" <Cassell.David@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Hardware questions
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Joe McCrary <joe.mccrary@GADATA.ORG> wrote [in part]: > Right now, we are using PC SAS, 8.12, on Win 2000 machines. About 512 MB Ram, 2 20-GB HD's. > P4 1.4 GHz. I know for a fact we'll need to upgrade our hard drives to several hundred MB's. > My questions are this: > 1. Would upgrading the amount of RAM make sense? Would I see a tremendous performance increase? > 2. Would a faster processor make a tremendous difference? > 3. Are there other solutions we ought to be exploring (non-SAS, such as SQL-Server or Oracle)? > My inclination here is no, because we need the multivariate analysis capacity.

[1] RAM can help, but given the capabilities of the upcoming SAS V9, you might seriously consider investing in a 2000/XP box with multiple processors. V9 will allow you to parallelize your sorts and proc means and so on, as well as pipelining your data steps. If you do up your RAM, consider putting in a *lot* of RAM. The SASFILE statement will let you load a file into memory for faster access, and being able to put all your working file in RAM could speed up your work considerably, depending on your usage. You might also want to look up some papers from this and earlier SUGIs on dealing with large datasets, sorting vs. indexing, and similar topics which are causing you grief.

[2] As above, multiple processors may help you more than a faster processor.

[3] SQL-Server and Oracle are great at transaction processing, but they just don't compare to SAS on read access for data manipulation or data analysis. They are tuned with different goals in mind, so why should they? Paul Dorfman has made at least one comparison in this list in the past year, so you could look up his post off the SAS-L archives:

http://www.listserv.uga.edu/archives/sas-l.html

Some posters in this group find that using Google to look up past posts is very fast.

HTH, David -- David Cassell, CSC Cassell.David@epa.gov Senior computing specialist mathematical statistician


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SAS-L page