Oninit cdi / Archive
Talk to an expert →

Re: SE Migration Path

Posted in 2004

Topics: Installation, Setup & Upgrades, Connectivity: ESQL/C, 4GL & Embedded SQL, Licensing & Editions, Migration, Import/Export & Data Conversion, Platform-Specific Issues, Internationalization & Character Sets, Versions, Editions & End-of-Life

Jonathan Leffler — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

als wrote: > Some help from the experienced to someone who's been out of touch with > Informix for a while.... > > We have a client running an old AIX system with Informix SE (7.24) and > 4GL(7.3) with around 50 users. > They would like to move on with a faster box, add an additional 60 users (as > well as start to develop the system more!). > > One path they would like to follow is to move away from RS6000 and AIX and > move on to a more "open" platform of an Intel box with Linux (probably > RedHat). > > The big question - what's the best path? > > 1. Get Linux machine, port system to SE on Linux and then upgrade to IDS > 2. Go straight for IDS on Linux. > 3. Dont bother with IDS and stay on SE/Linux > > These options assume IBM will sell us a cross-platform licences change from > AIX to Linux. > Anyone have experience of moving SE/4GL apps onto Linux - is it fairly > pain-free? > > Any comments/advice etc very much appreciated. As others suggested, why move from SE? You need a version of SE that actually runs on the Linux you want to use, but otherwise, there's no obvious reason to migrate from SE. If you had 1500 or more users, then yes (that's the biggest SE user-base I've heard of), but otherwise, there's no urgency to replace SE. If you do replace SE, I recommend IDS 9.x - 9.40.UC3 - rather than IDS 7.31 (or even OnLine 5.20, but that's not so clear cut as IDS 7.31). You don't need many of its features, but you do need its longevity. People already using IDS 7.31 are OK for the time being (another year at least), but new systems with no existing base should be using IDS 9.x exclusively. Any alternative advice on IDS 7.x is at least somewhat - in my view, highly - suspect. OnLine 5.20 was suggested as another alternative. It could be feasible; I wouldn't rule it out. However, if you are using GLS features for I18N, then OnLine is not a sensible option. -- Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h> Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/

↪ replying to Jonathan Leffler
rkusenet — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Jonathan Leffler wrote: > People already using IDS 7.31 are OK for the > time being (another year at least), but new systems with no existing > base should be using IDS 9.x exclusively. > > OnLine 5.20 was suggested as another alternative. It could be feasible; > I wouldn't rule it out. However, if you are using GLS features for > I18N, then OnLine is not a sensible option. > Does it mean that IDS 7.31 has a end of life timeline but not Online 5.20. How strange?

↪ replying to rkusenet
Obnoxio The Clown — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

rkusenet wrote: > Jonathan Leffler wrote: >> People already using IDS 7.31 are OK for the >> time being (another year at least), but new systems with no existing >> base should be using IDS 9.x exclusively. > >> >> OnLine 5.20 was suggested as another alternative. It could be feasible; >> I wouldn't rule it out. However, if you are using GLS features for >> I18N, then OnLine is not a sensible option. >> > > Does it mean that IDS 7.31 has a end of life timeline but not Online 5.20. > How strange? Not really. 7.31 has a viable "replacement" in 9.x, which has the same sort of target market. 5.20 is in a different place altogether... -- "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ''' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche

Glossary