Upgrade from system i 5.4 to 7.1 skipping 6.1

945 pts.
Tags:
AS/400
IBM i 6.1
iSeries upgrade
System i
Has anyone upgraded directly to 7.1 from 5.4 skipping 6.1? Any gotchas not obvious. What's your experience. Thanks.

Software/Hardware used:
System i model 550

Answer Wiki

Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.

we are about to undergoe a 5.x to 6.1 upgrade. according to the contractor help we use for this, IBM will analyze your code and if it is not at least at RPG IV standards, will not upgrade the system.

i have no hard data on this, but it’s worth looking into.

-Sarge

Discuss This Question: 20  Replies

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when members answer or reply to this question.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy
  • TomLiotta
    IBM will analyze your code and if it is not at least at RPG IV standards, will not upgrade the system. I'm not sure where that could have come from. It's not true, though there can be elements of applications that cannot be converted for V6R1. In any case, the upgrade of the OS is unrelated as far as whether it will complete successfully or not. Tom
    125,585 pointsBadges:
    report
  • WoodEngineer
    IBM provides a free tool to analyze your programs to see if they can convert to 6.1. In our case, the tool found a few rather old programs from a prior vendor which will not run in 6.1. Since we do not have the source for those programs will are looking for alternatives. This tool is available for download from IBM.
    6,425 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Lovemyi
    The tool is a PTF for V5R3 and V5R4 and is called ANZOBJCVN. There is a redbood "i5OS Program Conversion Getting ready for i5OS V6R1" that has the PTF number that you need. then you need to run it over your system to see if there are any programs that will not convert and those need to be fixed before you attempt to go to V6R1 or even V7R1 as part of theupgrade says to run the STROBJCNV conversion program over all your programs and JAVA programs in the IFS. Either way going from V5R4 to V6R1 or V7R1 you still need to run the conversion tool after and that can take some time. The analyzer tool will give you an estimate as to how much time for your system. This conversion can run with other things running and it will just slow down the system until everything is convertedf. Or you can let the user just convert everything when they open th programs for the first time but that will be painfully slow. We are going to V6R1 now and cannot go to V7R1 because the applciations are not all certified yet for V7R1 but are for V6R1. Make sure your applications are certified by the vendor for the latest release. Lovemyi
    2,310 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    Thanks. I already knew all of that (forgot about Windows tool, I used it going to 5.4). I'm looking for someone that's done it, not the hypothetical "it's doable". So far I've found all my vendors saying they are 7.1 ready!
    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • TomLiotta
    I suspect that it's rare for anyone to have jumped from V5R4 to V7R1. So far, there hasn't seemed to be much of a rush to go to 7.1 at all. I haven't dug into the advantages yet, even though we've installed it (and upgraded to it) multiple times just for testing. Except for testing, I can't think of why anyone would skip 6.1 just to hit 7.1. The extra effort of planning for a dual upgrade doesn't seem to have much benefit. A phased upgrade beginning with 6.1 seems more reasonable. 6.1 is now fairly mature, but 7.1 still has a greater risk that IBM hasn't caught up with PTFs. For 3rd-party products, even though they might be certified as ready, be very aware that you'll need to review the vendors' upgrade notes for both 6.1 and 7.1 for each product. (This goes especially for IBM itself.) An example of a potential "gotcha" comes from Java. 3rd-party products may require that specific features exist on the system. A product may require that Java be installed for example. On V5R4, there might be code that checks for the existence of product 5722JV1. The same 3rd-party product would need to be updated to look for 5761JV1 on 6.1. For 7.1, IBM chose to leave the product ID the same, so no change was needed for that. However, at the same time, IBM chose to change some numbering of the options. Where Java Developer Kit 1.4 was option 6 on 6.1, it became option 13 on 7.1. The 3rd-party product would need to check 7.1 for the new option number. Further, explicit actions must be taken when configuring the 6.1 to 7.1 upgrade in order even to have JDK 1.4 available on 7.1 after the upgrade completes. If it's not requested, JDK 1.4 simply disappears. So, a 3rd-party product (or home-grown) that was written a few releases ago explicitly to take advantage of JDK 1.4 features, might be very confused on 7.1. Even further, there have been changes in how you can tell Java what JVM to use and what the path is to find it -- e.g., java.home should now be JAVA_HOME for the 32-bit products. In short, it's perfectly possible for a product to work correctly on 7.1 while failing miserably after an upgrade to 7.1. There are plenty of circumstances where a number of steps might need to be taken to get to the right setup. Once the 7.1 environment is made to be appropriate, things would settle nicely. In any case, as far as ANZOBJCVN goes, it certainly isn't required although it's highly recommended. The upgrade will work whether you run it or not. It will tell you ahead of time if you have programs that were both (1) compiled before version 5 and (2) cleared of all observability. Except for 3rd-party products, you shouldn't have any of those. (Why remove observability for home-grown programs?) A program compiled on V5R1 or later can't have enough observability removed to stop its conversion. And a pre-V5 program with observability should convert fine. Your product vendors should handle their cases; report program names to their Support staff. Most likely, answers will be something like "Those programs are no longer used. Ignore them or delete them." And any of your programs can as easily be compiled after the upgrade as before, as long as you don't need to execute them immediately upon completing the upgrade. (And if you don't have the source code, it'll be just as hard to recompile now!) By compiling ahead of time, you take advantage of the lead time. Tom
    125,585 pointsBadges:
    report
  • WoodEngineer
    This month we upgraded from V5R4M0 to 6.1. I asked our IBM business partner the same question. He said that yes, it is possible to make the jump to 7.1 but recommended against it. This is from his response, "7.1 is basically 6.1.1 "enabled" to run on the new Power7 processors. Power7 processors don't make a lot of sense for most AS/400 or iSeries shops as they are designed to support application software that can be parallel processed by large numbers of CPUs. Think SAP or complex web-servers. . ."
    6,425 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    My main project leader is stating that there are alot of enhancements in 7.1; "Especially in the admin tools area. For rpg, I really think we want the native xml support along with a lot of the other enhancements. We are now getting customers asking us to use their webservice and that would make this a lot easier if we had the xml support in 7.1." Can anyone in development confrim this?
    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • DanTheDane
    Look at this link for more onfo on v7r1:
    http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redpieces/abstracts/sg247858.html?Open
    
    good luck DanF
    2,555 pointsBadges:
    report
  • DanTheDane
    Ouups... my prev entry should have been with another Q - sorry.. DanF PS: anyway - it's a good link to follow :-)
    2,555 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    What link? All I see is a scroll bar!
    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • TomLiotta
    Can anyone in development confrim this? Somebody probably can, but not me. All I'm aware of for RPG and XML in 7.1 is a couple minor functions, both of which are available (according to IBM) to 6.1 as PTFs. Most XML processing came into RPG with V5R4. XML-INTO and XML-SAX op-codes and the %xml BIF are all V5R4. Can you determine a particular item of need? Tom
    125,585 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Lovemyi
    If all your application vendors say that the versions you are running are all 7.1 compatible then I would say why now go to 7.1. You certainly will not mess anything up because it is usually all backward compatible. Make sure you and your developers read the read me for both V6R1 and 7.1 as both additional functionality will apply. I have in the past skipped several releases to get caught up when the business did not want to go through multiple testing and it has worked fine. Just make sure everyone reads the readme for both version you are skipping and the new one. Lovemyi
    2,310 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    Well, I upgraded our (first) development system Saturday from 5.4 to 7.1. So far so good. No more painful that any other upgrade I've ever done. If any glitches come up, I'll post them here.
    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Wareaglepop
    We went from 5.4 to 7.1 on 15+ partitions. The only bite that got us was smtp. Why plan and execute twice when once will do. You will also notice a performance increase.
    10 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    Performance increase? You mean the system consuming more resources? That's what happened when we finally went to 7.1 on production 2 months ago. We had SQL issues, something to do with IBM removing select/omit support of LF. Caused alot of scrambling to fine tune our SQL and logicals. Of course we don't know if those issues were related to 6.1 or 7.1?
    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • NubieEngineer

    Hello there OldSysAdmin, I know this response to the tag is more than 2 years old, but if you could spare a free moment of your time - we are finally in the midst of upgrading from v5r4 to v7r1 in our test box and we are seeing some SQL issues.  If you are able, can you please share your information as to how you went about in correcting your SQL issues during your upgrade?  Thank you.

    -Sam

     

    20 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    We had several SQL issues, performance related. We contacted IBM but in all cases they turned out to be poor coding practices.
    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • NubieEngineer

    Hello there - Thank you for your response, however, I was hoping more in regards to your previous response - "We had SQL issues, something to do with IBM removing select/omit support of LF."  In our SAP system, we are experiencing transport issues, where releasing transport request is causing following error:  Return code from tp: 0237

    Error text from tp: ERROR: unknown error during select from TCETARG

    We are assuming that the system had erred while trying to select from the table TCETARG.  It seems we have other issues such as the kernel and DBSL library that needs to be upgraded before we can resolve this problem.  Any related experiences that you would like to add, please don't hesitate.  Thank you for your time,

    -Sam

    20 pointsBadges:
    report
  • OldSysAdmin
    I'm not an SQL programmer so I can't help. And our developer said "

    It all depends on the situation. Hard to answer succinctly.... sorry."

    945 pointsBadges:
    report
  • TomLiotta

    In our SAP system, we are experiencing transport issues, where releasing transport request is causing following error:  Return code from tp: 0237

    Since this appears to be a new problem, I suggest you create a new question of your own with an appropriate subject. Few members are going to look through this old thread to see what you are asking. Even fewer will be members who might have something to contribute.

    “We had SQL issues, something to do with IBM removing select/omit support of LF.”

    This, for example, has nothing to do with your question. 'S'elect/'O'mit support never was removed in the first place. Even in V5R4, queries over such LFs were routed through the CQE rather than SQE. And if the IGNORE_DERIVED_INDEX query option with a parameter value of *YES is specified, the query could be forced to SQE (even in V5R4 and back to V5R3).

    You need your own question to avoid side issues such as that. Be sure to give enough info for members to be able to help.

    Tom

    125,585 pointsBadges:
    report

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

To follow this tag...

There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Thanks! We'll email you when relevant content is added and updated.

Following