I was previously unaware that legacy information systems were so important to so many people. When I hear of a legacy system I normally think of an outdated system that's been in use for a long time and is still in use even now. I imagined that most companies had at least a slightly updated information system at their back end to keep everything running. Of the three solutions to the problems of legacy systems, I hadn't previously thought of migration. I suppose it just seems similar to wrapping to me - I'm curious how it's possible to move the system to a more flexible environment while keeping everything the same without simply throwing a wrapper on it.
It's also interesting that if a system can be maintained within an acceptable budget then the system isn't usually considered a legacy system - and given that most companies apparently have legacy systems, that's a lot of companies over-budget in this one area. It seems like this big problem would have gathered more interest and work in the field.
It seems to make sense that lazy people who aren't terribly concerned about the long-term make wrapping the most popular choice of solution - especially given it seems to take the least work in comparison. Migration work is an in-between between redevelopment and wrapping in a way I didn't expect - it seems to be essentially copying the system over with everything wrapped in the actual code. You're just fitting the old data in a new form. It comes at no surprise that testing is important and may take most of an engineer's time.
No comments:
Post a Comment