Hi,
Is Data Integrator 5.5 is simlar to 11.x versions of BODI?
Why we call it acta?
any difference from GUI perspective?
Any documentation available for BODI 5.5 …?
sjain 
(BOB member since 2009-04-17)
ActaLink 3.1
ActaWorks 5.5
DataIntegrator 11.5
DataServices 12.2
is all the same code line, same product. If you use any of those versions you will be familiar with the others immediately.
In year 2002 the company Acta was acquired by BO
Werner Daehn 
(BOB member since 2004-12-17)
Thanks for your reply!! 
Actually,i have seen your response for migration(Upgradation) of ActaWorks5.2 to BODI XI R2.
you answered
Acta5 > Acta 6.5 > DI 11.7 > DS 21.x
Is it a right sequence…want to confirm with you?
or we can directly move repo_content from ActaWorks5.2 to DI 11.x or DS 12.x
can we lose some of our workif we do so
?
sjain (BOB member since 2009-04-17)
Still valid. No you cannot import just the ATL as such, at least not supported. You can try if there are not too many objects involved as you will have to check each and every very very carefully.
Werner Daehn (BOB member since 2004-12-17)
So as i interpret you, we should not migrate our repository content in a bulk (not in a single atl). It should be made of such that where a ATL file should have 2-5 similar or dependent Jobs. and make such ATL files of similar jobs. import it. Test it properly. modify if applicable.
How can we decide that migration should haapen in a particular sequence?
Is there any rule that supposed to be followed?
Actually, i know abit about Informatica’s PowerCenter, they have Upgradation strategy?
sjain (BOB member since 2009-04-17)
What I am saying is that your version is so old, it fell off the regular upgrade methods. So you should upgrade from one version to the next with the intermediate versions mentioned by you.
And you can try to upgrade the entire ATL instead, but only if you check each and every dataflow afterwards carefully. No guarantee it will work. Things like “truncate table” in the table loader options might not show up correctly for example.
Try to upgrade from Informatica 2.0 to the current version…same thing I guess.
Werner Daehn (BOB member since 2004-12-17)
Sorry, I didn’t mention. I have taken your point alreadyreagarding the intermediate updates.
My question for which i am wondering is
Case 1
if any one using BODI 6.X wants to migrate to DS XI 3.2.so what should be correct sequence for that ?
Case 2
if any one who is using BODI 11.7 want to upgrade to DS XI 3.2.
like that…
so, should it always be the first release of any series when your are migrating from previous major releases…
solution:–
Case 1
Sequence should be BODI 6.X >> BODI 11.X >> BODS 12.X
Case 2
Sequence should be BODI 11.7 >> DS XI 12.1 >> DS XI 12.X
Please verify it.
sjain 
(BOB member since 2009-04-17)
First one is correct, second can be done directly
BODI 11.7 >> DS XI 12.X
Werner Daehn (BOB member since 2004-12-17)
hi,
if BODI 6.X >> BODI 11.X >> BODS 12.X this is to be done.
then Actaworks 5>> BODI 11.7 this is also possible.
so ActaWorks 5>> BODI 11.5 >>BODI 11.7
why this BODI 11.5 is necessary as intermediate stage…?
It looks really strange.
sjain (BOB member since 2009-04-17)
Did you consider that the ATL structure may have changed in between these versions? Hence the limited backwards compatibility, e.g. being unable to go from AW5.5 to DS 12.2.0.
ActaWorks 5.5 and BODI 6.5 are not the same product - there’s almost 2 years of evolution in between them, not to mention bug fixes etc.
If you have actually worked with BODI 11.5 and 11.7, you would know that there are quite some differences in between these versions - they are definitely NOT the same either.
There is nothing strange about it. If you want your migration to have any chance of success, I would strongly recommend to follow the advised path. If you feel that this isn’t required and you would like to take some short cuts - that’s fine too but you would do well to inform your client / superior that you are deviating from best practice methods. In other words - you’ll be on your own.
ErikR 
(BOB member since 2007-01-10)
This is something that i was looking for. Thanks.
Actually i haven’t seen 11.5 so iwas just considering 11.7 as a minor release. Thats the confusion.
sjain (BOB member since 2009-04-17)
The number is somewhat confusing but 11.7 supports an array of features and improvements not found in 11.5.
Just to name two: the ability to influence how History Preservation sets the start and end dates for a SCD2 record for example or the ability to page to disk when a process consumes more than 2GB under Windows. With Data Integrator being a 32bit process under Windows, 11.5.x will just crash when a job consumes more than 2GB of RAM.
And there are loads more - 11.7 is definitely a step ahead of 11.5.
ErikR 
(BOB member since 2007-01-10)
Biggest thing for me: In 11.7 the concept of the datastore configuration was changed from 11.5 and finally made sense.
Werner Daehn (BOB member since 2004-12-17)