IntegrationHub ETL is a downgraded version of Classis transform maps?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report Inappropriate Content
on 09-21-2024 04:21 AM
For me, IntegrationHub ETL is a downgraded version of Classis transform maps.
Reason:
1. Using classic transform maps also I can target several target tables for a single data source. Whats special with IHETL?
2. Its easier to write scripting like onstart, onbefore, onafter etc.. but its a pain with IHETL.. not straight forward.
3. I can easily call IRE API and with this approach it will be dynamic. ie if you add new CI identifiers, calling IRE API will do the magic, but with IHETL, you need to edit the ETL app and make the adjustments (basically not dynamic in nature)
4. I can easily see how many records got created/updated/ignored etc with Transform maps, but not the case with IHETL.
So IHETL is a pain!!! its a downgraded solution !!! Do you agree or am I missing anything?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2026 09:30 AM - edited 02-23-2026 09:31 AM
There is a big performance difference that no one is pointing out here. With a transform map, if you transform the same source data to multiple different tables -- the import set records get duplicated. If you don't believe me, try it out for yourself. That is not efficient in my opinion. Plus, with the IntegrationHub ETL tool, it is much simpler to setup and manipulate the data before importing.
