dmbaker (10/9/2007)
Why don't folks use structured storage files more, rather than storing packages in SQL Server?
Well one thing was already mentioned: You loose your package layout. While this is no issue with simple packages, this is really a hassle, especially when you want to keep comments in your layout.
Putting packages in structured storage files makes moving packages around much easier (just a simple file copy) and it makes it possible to "version control" the packages too, if you want to do that.
Sometimes it is desireable to have a package in SQL Server. The nicest I can think of now is the way you open package logs. Only if you stored the package in SQL Server you can quickly open the logs by right clicking the Package in the repository.
We've got several packages for a couple of different systems that I've moved to structured storage files. And, after modifying the packages to allow them to be dynamically configured (via INI files), we've got one set of packages that can be used in three separate environments (development, staging, production).
Unfortunately there is an issue with INI files as soon as you reach a certain amount of settings in the file. This is why we stopped using the INI file.
Best Regards,
Chris Büttner