Migration from Informix

As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I would like to know What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations from Informix?? Thanks!

On Dec 16, 9:33 am, Griselda Alarcon <galar...@laanonima.com.ar> wrote: > As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I would like to know > What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations from Informix?? > > Thanks! DB2. IBM and SAP have been collaborating making DB2 the "engine of choice". Not to mention SAP doesn't want to recommend Oracle because then Oracle could try and sell you on moving to Oracle's financial applications. Informix to DB2 is probably the simplest migration in terms of SAP.

"Griselda Alarcon" <galarcon@laanonima.com.ar> wrote in message news:mailman.47.1229441604.1831.informix-list@iiug.org... > As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I > would like to know > What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations > from Informix?? > > Thanks!

On Dec 16, 4:33 pm, Griselda Alarcon <galar...@laanonima.com.ar> wrote: > As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I would like to know > What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations from Informix?? > > Thanks! A database migration is always risky and I guess that the SAP system is the heart of your IT. SAP might tell you that they've tested procedures for doing that and it shouldn't be a big deal. However anyone working in IT knows that such migrations are always a risk. Even if the migration will run smoothly , you might be disappointed in terms of performance and reliability from your new database engine. If I would be in your position, I would ask SAP why they force you to change the database that you are familiar and satisfied with. SAP made the decision to de-support IDS a few years ago. At that time IBM thought that they could take over the Informix business and convert the customers DB2 (LUW). We all know that this strategy has been a miserable failure. Things have changed since then and IDS is now a strategic product for IBM and the recommended database for critical OLTP environments that require round-the-clock availability. However it seems to me that SAP simply ignores IBM's new database strategy and forces customers to perform a risky migration with a doubtful result. But if customers accept this, SAP will continue with that questionable approach. So if you are satisfied with IDS, tell SAP that you are not willing to undergo a risky migration. If enough customers articulate their concerns, SAP might re- think their database strategy. Re-Supporting IDS would make sense for SAP and IBM. If they don't do it, they will just throw the money and the customer in the arms of the big O. Look at the recent maintenance increases done by SAP and the reaction of the customers. At least here in Germany many customers are re-thinking their SAP strategy and are not willing to accept a price increase which has no real countervalue. SAP holds no longer a monopoly in the ERP market and they would be well advised to do the same that IBM did: listening to their customers and establishing a new strategy regarding Informix. If you are satisfied with Informix, tell it to SAP and let them know that a forced migration would possibly open the door for the competition. f

Eric, Janet made the decision to talk with SAP and to convince them to drop IDS support and favor DB2 support after it was known that IBM's adoption of 'project arrowhead' wasn't going to work. Informix had XPS which was killed outright. (One could say that it competed too well against DB2.) Janet also sweetened the pot to put in code that would be beneficial to SAP when running on DB2. You are right that things have changed. However, Ambush hasn't done anything to reverse [this] perception. In light of the acquisitions made by Oracle, SAP, I believe has purchased their own database. Re-instating the port wouldn't be a bad thing for SAP, only IBM hasn't made enough noise as *the* vendor to have SAP support IDS. I'm afraid that its a little too late because the number of SAP customers running on IDS are too few for SAP to justify reconsidering the port. (Meaning if they were to lose all of these customers to Oracle, it would have minimal impact on their bottom line.) I would have to say that if SAP and IBM had a good partnership, SAP would maintain a port to IBM's two flagship engines IDS and DB2. Who knows, IBM may realize that IDS is outselling DB2 on LUW and consider keeping DB2 on the mainframe and existing customers while promoting IDS for the LUW space. What's the TCO of IDS vs DB2 or Oracle? The point is that it is sometimes better to lose a battle in an effort to win the war. DA Maroon did get one thing right. We're IBM's Informix marketing squad. So with the limited resources we have, why not exploit the advantages of IDS than to chase a losing effort. > From: eric@herber-consulting.de > Subject: Re: Migration from Informix > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:22:18 -0800 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > On Dec 16, 4:33 pm, Griselda Alarcon <galar...@laanonima.com.ar> > wrote: > > As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I would like to know > > What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations from Informix?? > > > > Thanks! > > A database migration is always risky and I guess that the SAP system > is the heart > of your IT. SAP might tell you that they've tested procedures for > doing that and it > shouldn't be a big deal. However anyone working in IT knows that such > migrations > are always a risk. Even if the migration will run smoothly , you might > be disappointed > in terms of performance and reliability from your new database engine. > > If I would be in your position, I would ask SAP why they force you to > change the > database that you are familiar and satisfied with. SAP made the > decision to > de-support IDS a few years ago. At that time IBM thought that they > could take > over the Informix business and convert the customers DB2 (LUW). We all > know that > this strategy has been a miserable failure. Things have changed since > then and > IDS is now a strategic product for IBM and the recommended database > for > critical OLTP environments that require round-the-clock availability. > > However it seems to me that SAP simply ignores IBM's new database > strategy and > forces customers to perform a risky migration with a doubtful result. > But if customers > accept this, SAP will continue with that questionable approach. > > So if you are satisfied with IDS, tell SAP that you are not willing to > undergo a risky > migration. If enough customers articulate their concerns, SAP might re- > think their > database strategy. Re-Supporting IDS would make sense for SAP and IBM. > If they > don't do it, they will just throw the money and the customer in the > arms of the big > O. > > Look at the recent maintenance increases done by SAP and the reaction > of the > customers. At least here in Germany many customers are re-thinking > their > SAP strategy and are not willing to accept a price increase which has > no real > countervalue. > SAP holds no longer a monopoly in the ERP market and they would be > well advised > to do the same that IBM did: listening to their customers and > establishing a new > strategy regarding Informix. > > If you are satisfied with Informix, tell it to SAP and let them know > that a forced migration > would possibly open the door for the competition. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Suspicious message? There’s an alert for that. http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_broad2_122008

On Dec 18, 5:10 pm, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Eric, > > Janet made the decision to talk with SAP and to convince them to drop IDS support and favor DB2 support after it was known that IBM's adoption of 'project arrowhead' wasn't going to work. Informix had XPS which was killed outright. (One could say that it competed too well against DB2.) > Shouldn't IBM sue Janet P. for all the damage she did to the IBM distributed database business ? :-) > Janet also sweetened the pot to put in code that would be beneficial to SAP when running on DB2. > Hmm, this just shows that DB2 (LUW) isn't as versatile and sophisticated as IDS is. It needs extra coding to work well under a specific workload. > You are right that things have changed. However, Ambush hasn't done anything to reverse [this] perception. In light of the acquisitions made by Oracle, SAP, I believe has purchased their own database. Re-instating the port wouldn't be a bad thing for SAP, only IBM hasn't made enough noise as *the* vendor to have SAP support IDS. > You are probably right on this. If IBM would assemble an attractive package consisting of technical assistance and men power to re-support IDS/SAP and if a high level executive like Steve Mills would present that package to SAP, then I couldn't imagine that SAP would say: "No, Thanks". But I'm sure that existing IDS/SAP customers also have a great level of influence. They just need to put some pressure on SAP which shouldn't be to hard to do. > I'm afraid that its a little too late because the number of SAP customers running on IDS are too few for SAP to justify reconsidering the port. > (Meaning if they were to lose all of these customers to Oracle, it would have minimal impact on their bottom line.) > You are probably wrong on that. The numbers I'm aware of show that there are still many SAP/IDS customers around and it would be benificial for both - SAP and IBM - to keep them away from Oracle. Some damage is already done, but the process of throwing the money in the arms of Oracle could still be stopped by SAP and IBM. If an SAP/IDS port would exist, IDS would also be an interesting option for new customers and projects on SAP. The MACH11 technology would bringSAP/IDS customers a great level of flexibility, allowing the to build database clusters for high availability and load balancing, something that can't be done so easily and out of the box with other IBM data servers. > I would have to say that if SAP and IBM had a good partnership, SAP would maintain a port to IBM's two flagship engines IDS and DB2. > Who knows, IBM may realize that IDS is outselling DB2 on LUW and consider keeping DB2 on the mainframe and existing customers while promoting IDS for the LUW space. > It will be interesting to see how many additional years it will take IBM to realize that this would have been probably the best strategy from the beginning on. > What's the TCO of IDS vs DB2 or Oracle? > > The point is that it is sometimes better to lose a battle in an effort to win the war. > DA Maroon did get one thing right. We're IBM's Informix marketing squad. So with the limited resources we have, why not exploit the advantages of IDS than to chase a losing effort. > I agree with you to a certain extent. Concentrating on new opportunities makes sense, but I still believe that the SAP battle isn't lost. Oracle puts more and more pressure on SAP and everything that helps to keep their customers away from Oracle and their clever sales teams, should be welcome by SAP as well as IBM. > > > > From: e...@herber-consulting.de > > Subject: Re: Migration from Informix > > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:22:18 -0800 > > To: informix-l...@iiug.org > > > On Dec 16, 4:33 pm, Griselda Alarcon <galar...@laanonima.com.ar> > > wrote: > > > As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I would like to know > > > What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations from Informix?? > > > > Thanks! > > > A database migration is always risky and I guess that the SAP system > > is the heart > > of your IT. SAP might tell you that they've tested procedures for > > doing that and it > > shouldn't be a big deal. However anyone working in IT knows that such > > migrations > > are always a risk. Even if the migration will run smoothly , you might > > be disappointed > > in terms of performance and reliability from your new database engine. > > > If I would be in your position, I would ask SAP why they force you to > > change the > > database that you are familiar and satisfied with. SAP made the > > decision to > > de-support IDS a few years ago. At that time IBM thought that they > > could take > > over the Informix business and convert the customers DB2 (LUW). We all > > know that > > this strategy has been a miserable failure. Things have changed since > > then and > > IDS is now a strategic product for IBM and the recommended database > > for > > critical OLTP environments that require round-the-clock availability. > > > However it seems to me that SAP simply ignores IBM's new database > > strategy and > > forces customers to perform a risky migration with a doubtful result. > > But if customers > > accept this, SAP will continue with that questionable approach. > > > So if you are satisfied with IDS, tell SAP that you are not willing to > > undergo a risky > > migration. If enough customers articulate their concerns, SAP might re- > > think their > > database strategy. Re-Supporting IDS would make sense for SAP and IBM. > > If they > > don't do it, they will just throw the money and the customer in the > > arms of the big > > O. > > > Look at the recent maintenance increases done by SAP and the reaction > > of the > > customers. At least here in Germany many customers are re-thinking > > their > > SAP strategy and are not willing to accept a price increase which has > > no real > > countervalue. > > SAP holds no longer a monopoly in the ERP market and they would be > > well advised > > to do the same that IBM did: listening to their customers and > > establishing a new > > strategy regarding Informix. > > > If you are satisfied with Informix, tell it to SAP and let them know > > that a forced migration > > would possibly open the door for the competition. > > > f > > > _______________________________________________ > > Informix-list mailing list > > Informix-l...@iiug.org > >http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list > > _________________________________________________________________ > Suspicious message? There’s an alert for that.http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_...

Eric, If you think that there are enough IDS/SAP customers, get Ambush to talk with SAP along with these customers. I don't think that those numbers are there. As to suing Janet, you can't sue someone for being an idiot. ;-) Then you could sue half the senior execs within all of IBM, along with a ton of fund managers on Wall St. ;-) I think you'll find out that there's other ways to grow the IDS market than to worry about SAP customers. Or some of the other ERP vendors that also decided not to continue their IDS port. (Again, all thanks to Janet) -G > From: eric@herber-consulting.de > Subject: Re: Migration from Informix > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:57:36 -0800 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > On Dec 18, 5:10 pm, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Eric, > > > > Janet made the decision to talk with SAP and to convince them to drop IDS support and favor DB2 support after it was known that IBM's adoption of 'project arrowhead' wasn't going to work. Informix had XPS which was killed outright. (One could say that it competed too well against DB2.) > > > Shouldn't IBM sue Janet P. for all the damage she did to the IBM > distributed database business ? :-) > > > Janet also sweetened the pot to put in code that would be beneficial to SAP when running on DB2. > > > Hmm, this just shows that DB2 (LUW) isn't as versatile and > sophisticated as IDS is. It needs extra coding to work well under a > specific workload. > > > You are right that things have changed. However, Ambush hasn't done anything to reverse [this] perception. In light of the acquisitions made by Oracle, SAP, I believe has purchased their own database. Re-instating the port wouldn't be a bad thing for SAP, only IBM hasn't made enough noise as *the* vendor to have SAP support IDS. > > > You are probably right on this. If IBM would assemble an attractive > package consisting of technical assistance and men power to > re-support IDS/SAP and if a high level executive like Steve Mills > would present that package to SAP, then I couldn't imagine that > SAP would say: "No, Thanks". But I'm sure that existing IDS/SAP > customers also have a great level of influence. They just need to put > some > pressure on SAP which shouldn't be to hard to do. > > > I'm afraid that its a little too late because the number of SAP customers running on IDS are too few for SAP to justify reconsidering the port. > > (Meaning if they were to lose all of these customers to Oracle, it would have minimal impact on their bottom line.) > > > You are probably wrong on that. The numbers I'm aware of show that > there are still many SAP/IDS customers around and it would be > benificial > for both - SAP and IBM - to keep them away from Oracle. Some damage is > already done, but the process of throwing the money in the arms > of Oracle could still be stopped by SAP and IBM. If an SAP/IDS port > would exist, IDS would also be an interesting option for new customers > and > projects on SAP. The MACH11 technology would bringSAP/IDS customers a > great level of flexibility, allowing the to build database clusters > for high availability and load balancing, something that can't be done > so easily and out of the box with other IBM data servers. > > > I would have to say that if SAP and IBM had a good partnership, SAP would maintain a port to IBM's two flagship engines IDS and DB2. > > Who knows, IBM may realize that IDS is outselling DB2 on LUW and consider keeping DB2 on the mainframe and existing customers while promoting IDS for the LUW space. > > > It will be interesting to see how many additional years it will take > IBM to realize that this would have been probably the best strategy > from the beginning on. > > > What's the TCO of IDS vs DB2 or Oracle? > > > > The point is that it is sometimes better to lose a battle in an effort to win the war. > > DA Maroon did get one thing right. We're IBM's Informix marketing squad. So with the limited resources we have, why not exploit the advantages of IDS than to chase a losing effort. > > > I agree with you to a certain extent. Concentrating on new > opportunities makes sense, but I still believe that the SAP battle > isn't lost. Oracle puts more and more pressure > on SAP and everything that helps to keep their customers away from > Oracle and their clever sales teams, should be welcome by SAP as well > as IBM. > > > > > > > > From: e...@herber-consulting.de > > > Subject: Re: Migration from Informix > > > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:22:18 -0800 > > > To: informix-l...@iiug.org > > > > > On Dec 16, 4:33 pm, Griselda Alarcon <galar...@laanonima.com.ar> > > > wrote: > > > > As everybody know IDS is not supported to SAP Kernel 7.0 and later, so I would like to know > > > > What is your next DB engine you choose?... Any experience in migrations from Informix?? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > A database migration is always risky and I guess that the SAP system > > > is the heart > > > of your IT. SAP might tell you that they've tested procedures for > > > doing that and it > > > shouldn't be a big deal. However anyone working in IT knows that such > > > migrations > > > are always a risk. Even if the migration will run smoothly , you might > > > be disappointed > > > in terms of performance and reliability from your new database engine. > > > > > If I would be in your position, I would ask SAP why they force you to > > > change the > > > database that you are familiar and satisfied with. SAP made the > > > decision to > > > de-support IDS a few years ago. At that time IBM thought that they > > > could take > > > over the Informix business and convert the customers DB2 (LUW). We all > > > know that > > > this strategy has been a miserable failure. Things have changed since > > > then and > > > IDS is now a strategic product for IBM and the recommended database > > > for > > > critical OLTP environments that require round-the-clock availability. > > > > > However it seems to me that SAP simply ignores IBM's new database > > > strategy and > > > forces customers to perform a risky migration with a doubtful result. > > > But if customers > > > accept this, SAP will continue with that questionable approach. > > > > > So if you are satisfied with IDS, tell SAP that you are not willing to > > > undergo a risky > > > migration. If enough customers articulate their concerns, SAP might re- > > > think their > > > database strategy. Re-Supporting IDS would make sense for SAP and IBM. > > > If they > > > don't do it, they will just throw the money and the customer in the > > > arms of the big > > > O. > > > > > Look at the recent maintenance increases done by SAP and the reaction > > > of the > > > customers. At least here in Germany many customers are re-thinking > > > their > > > SAP strategy and are not willing to accept a price increase which has > > > no real > > > countervalue. > > > SAP holds no longer a monopoly in the ERP market and they would be > > > well advised > > > to do the same that IBM did: listening to their customers and > > > establishing a new > > > strategy regarding Informix. > > > > > If you are satisfied with Informix, tell it to SAP and let them