Expressing complexity of migration to a database candidate
Some embodiments provide a method for expressing viability of a first database as a candidate for replacing a second database. The method identifies a first group of database queries that a group of applications directed towards the second database. The method produces a second group of queries by removing, from the first group, queries that are duplicates. Based on a set of complexity values associated with a set of components of the second group of queries, the method generates a complexity indicator representing a level of difficulty for rewriting the second group of queries for the second database.
1. A method for expressing viability of a first database as a candidate for replacing a second database, the method comprising:
identifying a first plurality of database queries that a plurality of applications directed towards the second database;
producing a second plurality of queries by removing, from the first plurality, queries that are duplicates;
based on a set of complexity values associated with a set of components of the second plurality of queries, generating a complexity indicator representing a level of difficulty for rewriting the second plurality of queries for that are written for the second database into a third plurality of queries that are written for the first database; and
providing the complexity indicator in a report for display in order to express the viability of replacing the second database with the first database.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the set of complexity values are defined with respect to the first database.
3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the set of complexity values are a set of compatibility values defined with respect to the second database.
4. The method of claim 3 , wherein the set of compatibility values are generated by identifying the set of components from a database-independent representation of the second plurality of queries.
5. The method of claim 1 , wherein the candidate first database is one of a plurality of candidate databases, and the report specifies a complexity indicator for each of the plurality of candidate databases.
6. The method of claim 1 further comprising receiving a selection of the first database from a plurality of candidate databases prior to generating the complexity indicator.
7. The method of claim 1 , wherein each query is a Structured Query Language (SQL) query comprising one or more SQL statements.
8. The method of claim 1 further comprising identifying the set of components of the second plurality of queries.
9. The method of claim 8 , wherein identifying the set of components comprises (i) grouping the components according to a set of component types and (ii) calculating a quantified number of each component type in the second plurality of queries; and
generating the complexity indicator comprises using the calculated quantified numbers for the different component types to calculate the complexity indicator.
10. The method of claim 9 , wherein calculating the complexity indicator comprises (i) assigning a weight value to each component type and (ii) performing a weighted sum of the quantified number of each type of component based on the assigned weighting values.
11. The method of claim 8 , wherein identifying the set of components comprises identifying a cost value for each identified component; and
generating the complexity indicator comprises calculating the complexity indicator from the identified cost values for the identified set of components.
12. The method of claim 1 further comprising migrating data stored in the second database to the first database after providing the complexity indicator in the report.
13. A non-transitory machine readable medium storing a program which when executed by at least one processing unit expresses viability of a first database as a candidate for replacing a second database, the program comprising sets of instructions for:
identifying a first plurality of database queries that a plurality of applications directed towards the second database;
producing a second plurality of queries by removing, from the first plurality, queries that are duplicates;
based on a set of complexity values associated with a set of components of the second plurality of queries, generating a complexity indicator representing a level of difficulty for rewriting the second plurality of queries for that are written for the second database into a third plurality of queries that are written for the first database; and
providing the complexity indicator in a report for display in order to express the viability of replacing the second database with the first database.
14. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the set of complexity values are defined with respect to the first database.
15. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the set of complexity values are a set of compatibility values defined with respect to the second database.
16. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the set of compatibility values are generated by identifying the set of components from a database-independent representation of the second plurality of queries.
17. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the candidate first database is one of a plurality of candidate databases, and the report specifies a complexity indicator for each of the plurality of candidate databases.
18. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the program further comprises sets of instructions for identifying the set of components of the second plurality of queries.
19. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 18 , wherein:
the set of instructions for identifying the set of components comprises a set of instructions for (i) grouping the components according to a set of component types and (ii) calculating a quantified number of each component type in the second plurality of queries; and
the set of instructions for generating the complexity indicator comprises a set of instructions for using the calculated quantified numbers for the different component types to calculate the complexity indicator.
20. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 19 , wherein the set of instructions for calculating the complexity indicator comprises a set of instructions for (i) assigning a weight value to each component type and (ii) performing a weighted sum of the quantified number of each type of component based on the assigned weighting values.
21. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 18 , wherein:
the set of instructions for identifying the set of components comprises a set of instructions for identifying a cost value for each identified component; and
the set of instructions for generating the complexity indicator comprises a set of instructions for calculating the complexity indicator from the identified cost values for the identified set of components.