
4-2 Prepare: Writing a Plan and Getting Ready to Migrate
Determine Migration Approach Adaptive Server Enterprise 11.5
The Table 4-1 highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each
migration approach.
For more information on these approaches, see the following
sections:
• Parallel With Replication 4-3
• Cutover Without Replication 4-5
• Phased Cutover 4-7
Table 4-1: Migration approaches
Approach Advantages Disadvantages When Used
Parallel
With
Replication
Easy fallback to release
10.0.2.5 or later. You do not
need to rebuild release
10.0.2.5 or later databases.
Minimal system down
time.
Can be complex in OLTP
environments.
Replication Server must be
set up, requiring extra
hardware and software.
You must be at release
10.0.2.5 or later. You can
replicate from release 4.x,
but you cannot replicate to
release 4.x.
This approach is best for
large 7x24 production
databases, maintaining
high availability, when:
• Rebuilding a release
10.0.2.5 or later database
can take too long.
• The system may have a
large number of
transactions and
complex Transact-SQL
queries with subqueries.
Cutover
Without
Replication
Can be executed with
minimal resource
demands.
Highest risk. Requires
down time for critical
migration tasks.
Recovery can be time
consuming in a production
environment.
This approach is likely for
resource-constrained
environments.
Phased
Cutover
Low risk with low
development overhead.
Especially conducive to
testing.
May require additional
resources—either more
memory or a second
system, if both
pre-release 11.x and
release 11.x servers do not
perform acceptably on the
current system.
Requires tighter
coordination with
application groups and
database owners.
If neither of the other two
approaches seems
appropriate, you can use a
phased cutover.
Kommentare zu diesen Handbüchern