
A: We started the development of IDMS migration tools in 2002 and we executed our first IDMS migration project 2004.
A: Yes, including the following organisations:
|
Name |
Project specifics |
Data Points |
| LCM ANMC– largest Health Insurer in Belgium | MF/IDMS to COBOL Oracle Unix | 4000 users |
| Swets in the Netherlands and present in 20 countries around the globe |
MF/IDMS to COBOL DB2 Linux | 800 users |
| City of Brussels in Belgium | MF/IDMS to COBOL Oracle Windows | 200 users |
| Ministry of Finance in France | MF/IDMS to MF/COBOL CICS Oracle | 14000 users |
| Bank in Spain (under NDA) with 200 regional offices |
MF/IDMS to MF/COBOL CICS DB2 | 1200 users |
| Division of Rabo Bank (global bank) in the Netherlands |
MF/IDMS DB to SQL Server Windows | 250 GB data |
| Tax Authorities of the State of New Mexico in USA |
MF/IDMS DB to SQL server Windows | 50 GB data |
| Unigarant Insurance in the Netherlands | MF/IDMS DB to Oracle Windows | 250 GB data |
A: Once the Pre-Migration Analysis has identified and defined the work and tasks involved, we deliver two documents:
A: We distinguish between three types of deliverables:
A: Anubex provides documents (and training) relating to:
Anubex do not provide documentation regarding third-party software (e.g. IBM MQ documentation), nor third-party technologies or programming languages (e.g. Java documentation).
A: Yes, it is known as SOAR – Snapshot Oriented Automated Reduction.
The main characteristics of SOAR are:
Please refer to the white paper on SOAR for further information
A: All COBOL and ADS code is converted automatically by the Anubex conversion tools. There are some rare situations where it becomes necessary to perform manual adjustments, but it is typically limited to less than 1% of the code. This is occasionally due to a gap in the conversion tool, e.g. an example of statement syntax not yet fully supported, or for performance tuning reasons. Another scenario where manual intervention can be required is if a migration project involves only a subset of a group of applications that interact with each other on the source platform. Assembler programs are converted manually
A: Our COBOL conversion acts as a preprocessor-alike tool: it leaves all non-IDMS syntax unaltered (i.e. preserving whitespace and layout). It only replaces or inserts new COBOL syntax as replacement for IDMS DML. The only customization that is currently possible, are naming conventions for paragraphs and variables that are generated inside the converted program.
IN the case of ADS dialogs, a complete new COBOL program is generated, based on a COBOL ‘dialog’ template. This template can be customized at will, as long as it keeps the relevant hook-points.
A: Data access can be handled in two ways:
The trade-offs:
|
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
|
IO Modules |
|
|
|
ESQL |
|
|
More detailed information can be made available on this topic upon application: Please contact us.
A: We have never experienced problems with the performance of the migrated code. This is largely due to the capabilities of modern hardware and compilers. We do, however, sometimes need to enable compiler performance switches.
From our experience, performance tuning generally correlates to database access efficiency. Database optimization on tablespaces, indexes etc. will normally resolve any database access performance issues. Another technique is to restrict the volume of data retrieved. Our IO modules have an entry point, specifically for this purpose. However, using this entry point and analyzing the extra criteria to filter the data does introduce the need for additional, manual effort.
A: Assemblers will be re-created as COBOL (or C) programs: this is manual work and can only be performed after gaining a thorough understanding of the assemblers’ functionality and use. Customer input is required, in order to achieve this.
A: None, except for assembler programs, the conversion of which is a manual process in any case.
A: Manual work represents adaptations made to delivered or converted artifacts, which initially need to be completed by a person, as opposed to being executed automatically by software.
Reasons for introducing manual work include:
A: Risks are commonly associated with manual work, due to the very fact that it is not automated, i.e. manual work is prone to inadvertent error or omission. However, Anubex has a strict methodology for handling manual work, a methodology that is enforced by automated mechanisms within Anubex' Migratonomy product, which effectively eliminates the risk associated with manual processes. The key elements of Microtonomy’s functionality are:
A: We will be pleased to provide examples of migrated COBOL programs upon application. Please contact us.
A: We will be pleased to provide examples of migrated ADS dialogs/programs upon application. Please contact us.
A: We do not currently offer a migration of maps to CICS BMS. In brief, use of BMS with a runtime library introduces additional and undesirable points of maintenance, and an associated risk of inconsistency. Use of BMS without a runtime library would significantly increase of the volume of code in the converted programs. BMS also introduces further limitations. Please see below for a more detailed analysis of this topic.
Our current offering is based upon:
IDMS OLM map specific properties that are not directly supported by BMS include:
Using BMS maps with a UI-runtime library
The UI-runtime library needs to know the IDMS OLM map specific properties to provide the same behavior as the IDMS runtime. These IDMS OLM map specific properties would have to be maintained in a different place to the BMS map source – in a COBOL copybook, for example. This means there are two points of maintenance for the same artifact. Additionally, the UI-runtime library must know the position of the fields on the screen, to calculate the number of detail occurrences on pageable maps, for example. The developer must therefore also include this information in the COBOL copybook. This must match the positioning information of the BMS map, which potentially introduces a risk of inconsistency. In short, the maintenance of BMS maps (using SDF2, for example) would be primarily for positioning the fields and labels on the screen, and this information would need to be duplicated in the data structure that is used by the UI-runtime library.
Using BMS maps without a UI-runtime library
The IDMS UI runtime provides IDMS specific screen behavior such as:
When using a BMS map without any runtime, (parts of) this logic would have to be inserted in each migrated program, which would result in an enormous increase in the number of lines of code to be maintained.
If you require additional information please contact us with your questions.
From small companies to multinationals, from health insurers to airlines, all Anubex customers save time and money by modernizing their applications with the right set of migration tools.