Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:51:54 +0000
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Ian Whitlock <iw1junk@COMCAST.NET>
Subject: Re: Q: v6 to v9
500,000 lines of log and 4,000 observations doesn't look like good odds.
I once had a runaway program something like your description. It was
due to a missing coma in main macro call. Are you sure that it is a
version problem? The changes in macro that could cause problems in a
latter version are mainly the introduction of new words that didn't have
a meaning in a prior version.
Since you say, you have been able to run with an empty data set, at least
I think that is what "got it to run with just the data structure" means,
you might try the MFILE option to get the generated code and then run that
on some data.
For another approach, you might give us some information. Are we looking
at one macro of 20 lines? Or 100 macros with an average of 1,000 lines?
Are the 500,000 lines of log code and notes, or the result of PUT
statements? Is the number of lines do to an infinite loop? Or a complex
How long was the log when it ran in version 6? How long did it take to
execute? What sort of things does it do?
On the other hand, if you just want sympathy, you have it.
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:44:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCHM)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion"
From: "Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCHM)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Subject: Q: v6 to v9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I am (attempting) testing some user v6 programs.
The user supplied a v6 format catalog:
which prompts SAS to conclude the
libname statement to use the v6 engine.
NOTE: SAS (r) 9.1 (TS1M3)
8 LIBNAME LIBRARY "!ProjRoot\sas7b";
NOTE: Libref LIBRARY was successfully assigned as follows:
Physical Name: L:\Temp\sas7b
The test program writes a Library.DataSet
with ~200 vars and (eventually) ~4000 rows.
The user complains that SAS hangs and never completes the data step.
I've just aborted a run with 500,000 lines in the log
and got it to run with just the data structure
so I could see the Proc Contents:
there are no numerics with length of 4, 6 and 7
but methinks too many with lengths 3 and 5
... oh! several $200.
I suppose this is just my mumbling
while trying to figure out
why a macro with an %Include doesn't run in v9
Ron Fehd the macro maven