DataStage vs COBOL
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
DataStage vs COBOL
Hi,
We are planning to build a new application using DataStage for transforming the data based on the business need. A part of the application is already available in Mainframes on COBOL programs.
As investment in DS is a big decision, our boss puts questions like what are the advantages of designing the new application on DataStage instead of enhancing the existing one on the Mainframes. He thinks of, apart from GUI interface what would be the benefit of switching to the DS platform.
He questions that COBOL too processes the records sequentially, the way DS is going to handle it. What all would be the reasons to substantiate / justify that going into DataStage platform is better than programming in COBOL. Please provide your ideas / suggestions.
Thanks.
We are planning to build a new application using DataStage for transforming the data based on the business need. A part of the application is already available in Mainframes on COBOL programs.
As investment in DS is a big decision, our boss puts questions like what are the advantages of designing the new application on DataStage instead of enhancing the existing one on the Mainframes. He thinks of, apart from GUI interface what would be the benefit of switching to the DS platform.
He questions that COBOL too processes the records sequentially, the way DS is going to handle it. What all would be the reasons to substantiate / justify that going into DataStage platform is better than programming in COBOL. Please provide your ideas / suggestions.
Thanks.
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
No advantage at all in moving to DataStage, if you have, and will continue to have, the skilled resources to maintain the COBOL applications. Can that be guaranteed? It's more likely, in ten years time, that there will be a big pool of DataStage developers around than a big pool of COBOL programmers.
Then again, COBOL has proven remarkably resilient over the years, and was given a big boost by the Y2K non-event.
Then again, COBOL has proven remarkably resilient over the years, and was given a big boost by the Y2K non-event.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Agreed. Use DataStage 390 when you have no COBOL programming resources available, that's where the advantage lies.
Amazing... COBOL was a 'dead' language way back when I was doing it in the 80's. The main processing systems here are all 'COBOL over Oracle' behemoths. Make that more like UNdead!
[grrrr!!! argggg!!]
Amazing... COBOL was a 'dead' language way back when I was doing it in the 80's. The main processing systems here are all 'COBOL over Oracle' behemoths. Make that more like UNdead!
[grrrr!!! argggg!!]
-craig
"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
-
- Participant
- Posts: 3593
- Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 5:25 pm
- Location: Australia, Melbourne
- Contact:
Don't forget DataStage for Unix System Services on the mainframe. This is a massively parallel product that really leverages the muscle of a mainframe and does not need to generate COBOL code. Might be cheaper than the 360 and you can leverage it for off mainframe processing as well.
Certus Solutions
Blog: Tooling Around in the InfoSphere
Twitter: @vmcburney
LinkedIn:Vincent McBurney LinkedIn
Blog: Tooling Around in the InfoSphere
Twitter: @vmcburney
LinkedIn:Vincent McBurney LinkedIn
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
we are in a big project now to replace cobol with DataStage, and we are also moving the application to AIX, which is cheaper than MVS platform.
The main reasons for moving ang using datastage
Documentation.
Metadata.
Easier to maintain end enhance in the future.
Reasorses/programers in the future.
But we are not replacing all the cobol/JCL at once but running the cobol/jcl from datastage and implemeting all new functionality through datastage.
The main reasons for moving ang using datastage
Documentation.
Metadata.
Easier to maintain end enhance in the future.
Reasorses/programers in the future.
But we are not replacing all the cobol/JCL at once but running the cobol/jcl from datastage and implemeting all new functionality through datastage.
The migration to another platform is key in your decision. For someone not changing platforms (like the OP) and needing to continue to maintain / enhance their existing COBOL with their existing pool of COBOL coders... I don't really see the need. YMMV.Jorn wrote:we are in a big project now to replace cobol with DataStage, and we are also moving the application to AIX, which is cheaper than MVS platform.
-craig
"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact: