1. Migrating Access Applications to.NET and SQL Server Ken Youngkyoung@nusoftsolutions.comkyoung@nusoftsolutions.com Tim LandgraveTimL@2ndGS.comTimL@2ndGS.com

2. Agenda Why Migrate from Access? Current Access Migration Methods Why is Migration Tedious, Difficult and Expensive? What are the Business Benefits of Migrating? Tool - Application Refactoring and Migration Suite (ARMS) How Can ARMS Help and Why?

3. Driving issues for Access Migration Not a Client/Server architecture –Value is Performance, flexibility, management Basic database administration Data re-centralization Workgroup applications “grow up” –Number of user increase –Data capacity requirements outgrow Access MDB size and performance guidelines –Functional complexity outgrows MS Access and VBA capability Security requirements tighten End user freedom, agility Data integration flexibility Self-service (i.e. reporting, analysis)

4. Benefits to Customers Platform Support –Windows Platform and.NET Framework –SQL Server 2000 –RDBMS –Reporting Services –Visual Studio.NET –Enables Office 2003 deployment Customers want to deploy Office 2003 and can’t due to Access 97 dependency Customer Satisfaction –Eliminates Access database corruption issues –Increases the availability of the data (slow connections) –Removes Access MDB file deployment Technical Advantages –Scalability –Data Security –Improved performance –Reliability –Team Development

5. Challenges – Until NOW! Developer quality tools Form & Report Migration was a manual process and therefore COST PROHIBITIVE Reliable & consistent methodology Migrate cost, and analysis thereof

6. Access Application types Mission Critical Apps Reporting Apps Non-Mission Critical Apps Departmental & Workgroup Applications Component Re-use (forms, reports, modules)

7. What an Access Application is… MS Access MDB File LIMIT: 2 gigabytes minus the space needed for system objects. Form Report VBA Code \\fileserver\sharename NOT a Server based architecture Network Client Computer Client Computer Client Computer Client Computer Biggest Issue: Everyone obtains a copy of the MDB file in their client computers memory Every computer makes a local working copy of the MDB file Key architecture concerns Fat client No Server side processing

8. Microsoft.NET Application Server Form Report Code Microsoft.NET Application Server Form Report Code After Migrating to.NET and SQL Server Microsoft SQL Server Database Pure Client/Server based architecture Network Client Computer Client Computer Client Computer Client Computer Key benefits: Reliability Performance Scalability Security Flexibility Management & Control Reduced cost of ownership Every computer only uses data they need! Microsoft.NET Application Server Form Report Code Key benefits: Thin client/Browser Option Rich Client Strong Security (SSL)

9. Refactoring @ Work User Interface Business Logic Data Access SQL Server Access Application Automate

10. What this means Deployment –No more downloading.mdb to client Better memory utilization on client –No longer loading Access engine on workstation Better utilization of SQL Server

11. Migration Process Data QueryDefs Forms Code Reports

12. Processing Data Migrate data using the Upsizing Wizard –Does a decent job –Reports on the process –Can result in.mdb linked to SQL

13. Processing QueryDefs Upsizing wizard does not do much SQL Syntax must match SQL Server –Lots of tweaking –Testing of new syntax –Porting to stored procedure / view is optional

14. Processing Forms Forms require recoding Very tedious process –Controls/properties/attributes –Rewiring event handlers

15. Processing Code Convert code to VB.NET –Language constructs (VBA to VB.NET) –Access specific code Items such as message box, forms, etc Data features such as dlookup –Data objects DAO / RDO to ADO.NET

16. Processing Reports SQL Reporting Services –Import Access reports to SQL Reports –Moves reports to web –Allows for feature rich easy to use reports IT and user friendly

17. Migration Tools 2 nd Genesis Software Application Refactoring and Migration Suite (ARMS.NET) –Form Converter –Object Builder –Access2NET Resource Kit QueryDef Converter VBA to.NET Win Forms Databinder SQL Server Reporting Services Import Tool (Microsoft) Coming Soon… –Access to ASP.NET

18. Automated Migration Using 2 nd Genesis ARMS.NET Tools Reporting Apps Non-Mission Critical Apps Departmental & Workgroup Applications Component Re-use (forms, reports, modules) Reporting Services Import Tool 2 nd Genesis ARMS.NET – Forms, QueryDefs, Code Microsoft Access Upsizing Wizard Mission Critical Apps – Forms, QueryDefs, Code 2nd Genesis ARMS.NET – Forms, QueryDefs, Code Microsoft Access Upsizing Wizard 2nd Genesis ARMS.NET Tools Save $$

19. Migration Process Using ARMS.NET Analyze the initial.mdb using Create plan Convert the Access Application –Data Upsize the Access MDB to SQL Server Convert Access QueryDefs to SQL Server Stored Procedures –UI Convert Access forms to.NET WinForms –Business Migrate VBA Code to.NET Classes that manage the data Tie Forms to.NET Classes –Reports Convert Access Reports to SQL Reporting Services reports Modify QueryDefs to use SQL Server data directly –Final System Testing

20. CategoryFile Count Forms671 Code Modules26 QueryDefs1400 Reports274 Header1 Total972 Conversion Example National Services company has built its business on one Access file –Initial.mdb was 64MB (one project) No data, only forms and code –Analysis when converted shows:

21. Developer Productivity Typical approach to manual forms conversion with error rate, analysis, QA, and repair applied to example customer application For Example, a single form with 10 controls with 150 properties will require: –2 hours to analyze –16 hours to convert code –6.64 hours to debug and repair –At $50/hour (burdened rate), this single form costs $1,232 to convert –Sample application is 16,000 hours in forms Which at $50/hour is approximately $800,000 JUST for Form conversion Conversion without tools is cost prohibitive!

22. Why our approach is better Fewer errors in development –Client does not pay to find and fix errors not introduced Cost is drastically lower than manual conversion –More reliable code –Focus on features not mundane tasks Better use of developer effort –Adding new Functionality –Re-factoring - not rewriting remodel to achieve goals above Bottom line –Reduction of engineering staff for mundane tasks –QA improves dramatically (developer errors go down dramatically) –Client should not spend money to have bodies convert Access attributes to.NET target attributes