Database evaluation method and device, equipment, medium and program product

Abstract

The invention provides a database evaluation method and device, equipment, a medium and a program product, which can be applied to the technical field of databases, the technical field of financial science and technology or other related technical fields. The method comprises the following steps: collecting respective database information of a first database and a second database; respectively extracting evaluation index information corresponding to each evaluation index type from respective database information of the first database and the second database; for each evaluation index type, inputting the evaluation index information, corresponding to the evaluation index type, of the first database and the second database into an evaluation model together, and outputting an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type; comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation index type with a standard value to obtain a first evaluation result for the second database; and under the condition that the first evaluation result represents that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database, determining the second database as the target to-be-immigrated database.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present disclosure relates to the field of database technology, financial technology or other related technical fields, and in particular to a database evaluation method, device, equipment, medium and program product. Background Art

[0002] Database systems play an increasingly important role in enterprise information, but with the development of business and the upgrading of technology, the migration of database systems has become a difficult problem that needs to be solved urgently. However, existing database migration solutions often lack a set of scientific benchmark evaluation methods and assessment systems, which makes it impossible to accurately measure the impact of various factors on database system performance and stability during the migration process, thus bringing many uncertainties and risks. Summary of the invention

[0003] In view of the above problems, the present disclosure provides a database evaluation method, apparatus, device, medium and program product.

[0004] According to a first aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a database evaluation method, comprising:

[0005] Collecting database information of a first database and a second database, wherein the first database stores application data to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database for application data to be migrated into the first database;

[0006] Extracting evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type from database information of the first database and the second database, respectively, wherein the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type is used to evaluate database migration;

[0007] For each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type in the first database and the second database is input into the evaluation model, and the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is output;

[0008] By comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each of the evaluation indicator types with the standard value, a first evaluation result for the second database is obtained; and

[0009] In the case where the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database, the second database is determined as the target database to be migrated.

[0010] A second aspect of the present disclosure provides a database evaluation device, including: a collection module, an extraction module, an input module, a comparison module and a determination module.

[0011] Among them, the acquisition module is used to collect the database information of the first database and the second database, wherein the first database stores the application data to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database for the application data to be migrated into the first database. The extraction module is used to extract the evaluation index information corresponding to each evaluation index type from the database information of the first database and the second database, wherein the evaluation index information corresponding to each evaluation index type is used to evaluate database migration. The input module is used to input the evaluation index information corresponding to the evaluation index type of the first database and the second database into the evaluation model for each evaluation index type, and output the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type. The comparison module is used to obtain the first evaluation result for the second database by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation index type with the standard value. The determination module is used to determine that the second database is the target database to be migrated when the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the application requirements of the first database.

[0012] A third aspect of the present disclosure provides an electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; and a memory for storing one or more computer programs, wherein the one or more processors execute the one or more computer programs to implement the steps of the above method.

[0013] The fourth aspect of the present disclosure further provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program or instructions stored thereon, which implements the steps of the above method when the above computer program or instructions are executed by a processor.

[0014] The fifth aspect of the present disclosure further provides a computer program product, including a computer program or instructions, which implement the steps of the above method when the above computer program or instructions are executed by a processor.

[0015] The present disclosure provides a database evaluation method, apparatus, device, medium and program product, which are based on evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type extracted from a first database and a second database for evaluating database migration, and through an evaluation model, evaluate the second database from multiple evaluation indicator types such as database attributes and database processing performance, so as to comprehensively understand whether the second database can meet the needs of the application, accurately evaluate the feasibility and effect of the database migration plan, and effectively reduce the risk and uncertainty of database migration. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0016] The above contents and other objects, features and advantages of the present disclosure will become more apparent through the following description of the embodiments of the present disclosure with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:

[0017] Figure 1The application scenario diagram of the database evaluation method according to the embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown;

[0018] Figure 2 A flowchart schematically illustrates a method for evaluating a database according to an embodiment of the present disclosure;

[0019] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of a system for executing a database evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown;

[0020] Figure 4 A structural block diagram schematically shows a database evaluation device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure; and

[0021] Figure 5 A block diagram of an electronic device suitable for implementing a database evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0022] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present disclosure will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings. However, it should be understood that these descriptions are exemplary only and are not intended to limit the scope of the present disclosure. In the following detailed description, for ease of explanation, many specific details are set forth to provide a comprehensive understanding of the embodiments of the present disclosure. However, it is apparent that one or more embodiments may also be implemented without these specific details. In addition, in the following description, descriptions of known structures and technologies are omitted to avoid unnecessary confusion of the concepts of the present disclosure.

[0023] The terms used herein are only for describing specific embodiments and are not intended to limit the present disclosure. The terms "comprise", "include", etc. used herein indicate the existence of the features, steps, operations and / or components, but do not exclude the existence or addition of one or more other features, steps, operations or components.

[0024] All terms (including technical and scientific terms) used herein have the meanings commonly understood by those skilled in the art unless otherwise defined. It should be noted that the terms used herein should be interpreted as having a meaning consistent with the context of this specification and should not be interpreted in an idealized or overly rigid manner.

[0025] When using expressions such as "at least one of A, B, and C, etc.", they should generally be interpreted according to the meaning of the expression commonly understood by those skilled in the art (for example, "a system having at least one of A, B, and C" should include but is not limited to a system having A alone, B alone, C alone, A and B, A and C, B and C, and / or A, B, C, etc.).

[0026] In the technical solution of the present disclosure, the user information (including but not limited to user personal information, user image information, user device information, such as location information, etc.) and data (including but not limited to data used for analysis, stored data, displayed data, etc.) involved are all information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties, and the collection, storage, use, processing, transmission, provision, disclosure and application of the relevant data comply with relevant laws, regulations and standards, take necessary confidentiality measures, do not violate public order and good morals, and provide corresponding operation entrances for users to choose to authorize or refuse.

[0027] In the scenario of using personal information for automated decision-making, the methods, devices, and systems provided by the embodiments of the present disclosure provide users with corresponding operation portals for users to choose to agree or reject the automated decision-making results; if the user chooses to reject, the expert decision-making process will be entered. The expression "automated decision-making" here refers to the activity of automatically analyzing and evaluating a person's behavioral habits, interests and hobbies, or economic, health, credit status, etc. through computer programs, and making decisions. The expression "expert decision-making" here refers to the activity of making decisions by people who specialize in a certain field, have specialized experience, knowledge and skills, and have reached a certain level of professionalism.

[0028] Figure 1 The application scenario diagram of the database evaluation method according to the embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown.

[0029] like Figure 1 As shown, the application scenario 100 according to this embodiment may include a first terminal device 101, a second terminal device 102, a third terminal device 103, a network 104, and a server 105. The network 104 is used to provide a medium for a communication link between the first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, the third terminal device 103, and the server 105. The network 104 may include various connection types, such as wired, wireless communication links, or optical fiber cables, etc.

[0030] The user can use the first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, and the third terminal device 103 to interact with the server 105 through the network 104 to receive or send messages, etc. Various communication client applications can be installed on the first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, and the third terminal device 103, such as shopping applications, web browser applications, search applications, instant messaging tools, email clients, social platform software, etc. (only for example).

[0031] The first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, and the third terminal device 103 may be various electronic devices having display screens and supporting web browsing, including but not limited to smart phones, tablet computers, laptop computers, desktop computers, and the like.

[0032] The server 105 may be a server that provides various services, such as a background management server (only as an example) that provides support for websites browsed by users using the first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, and the third terminal device 103. The background management server may analyze and process the received data such as user requests, and feed back the processing results (such as web pages, information, or data obtained or generated according to user requests) to the terminal device.

[0033] For example, the server 105 collects database information of the first database and the second database respectively, and extracts evaluation index information corresponding to each evaluation index type from the database information of the first database and the second database respectively, so that for each evaluation index type, the evaluation index information of the first database and the second database respectively corresponding to the evaluation index type is input into the evaluation model together, and the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type is output, and the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation index type is compared with the standard value to obtain a first evaluation result for the second database, so as to determine that the second database is the target database to be migrated when the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the application requirements of the first database.

[0034] It should be noted that the database evaluation method provided in the embodiment of the present disclosure can generally be executed by the server 105. Accordingly, the database evaluation device provided in the embodiment of the present disclosure can generally be set in the server 105. The database evaluation method provided in the embodiment of the present disclosure can also be executed by a server or server cluster that is different from the server 105 and can communicate with the first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, the third terminal device 103 and / or the server 105. Accordingly, the database evaluation device provided in the embodiment of the present disclosure can also be set in a server or server cluster that is different from the server 105 and can communicate with the first terminal device 101, the second terminal device 102, the third terminal device 103 and / or the server 105.

[0035] It should be understood that Figure 1 The number of terminal devices, networks and servers in the embodiment is only for illustration. Any number of terminal devices, networks and servers may be provided according to implementation requirements.

[0036] The following will be based on Figure 1 The scene described by Figure 2~Figure 3 The database evaluation method of the embodiment of the present disclosure is described in detail.

[0037] Figure 2 The flowchart of the database evaluation method according to the embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown.

[0038] like Figure 2 As shown, the method 200 includes operations S210 to S250.

[0039] In operation S210 , database information of each of the first database and the second database is collected.

[0040] The first database stores application data to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database for application data to be migrated into the first database.

[0041] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the first database is a database from which application data needs to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database to be migrated, that is, it is desired to migrate the application data in the first database to the second database, but due to differences in versions, statements, etc. between different databases, migration between databases is risky and uncertain. Therefore, before migrating the application data in the first database to the second database, the second database is evaluated to determine whether the second database can meet the requirements of the application in the first database, that is, whether the application data in the first database can be migrated to the second database.

[0042] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, to evaluate the second database, it is necessary to collect database information of the first database and the second database for subsequent evaluation and analysis, wherein the database information includes but is not limited to the data table structure.

[0043] In operation S220, evaluation index information corresponding to each evaluation index type is extracted from database information of each of the first database and the second database.

[0044] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, evaluation index information corresponding to each evaluation index type is used to evaluate database migration. The evaluation index types can be divided into five categories: database attributes, database object attributes, database processing performance, database capacity level, and database disaster recovery capability.

[0045] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, since the database information includes various types of information and the present disclosure is aimed at database migration, it is sufficient to extract the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type from the database information of the first database and the second database respectively, and the remaining information is not required. The extracted evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type can be used for subsequent evaluation of the second database, that is, to evaluate the migration process of migrating the application data in the first database to the second database.

[0046] In operation S230 , for each evaluation indicator type, evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type in the first database and the second database is input into the evaluation model, and an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is output.

[0047] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, since the migration process from the first database to the second database needs to be evaluated, it is necessary to jointly analyze the evaluation indicator information of each of the first database and the second database under the same evaluation indicator type. Thus, for each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation indicator data of the first database and the second database corresponding to the evaluation indicator type can be jointly input into the evaluation model, and the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type can be output, so that the second database can be evaluated for the evaluation indicator type based on the evaluation value, that is, based on the evaluation value, it is judged whether the second database meets the application needs of the first database for the evaluation indicator type.

[0048] For example, by inputting information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type of database attribute into the evaluation model, an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type of database attribute can be obtained.

[0049] In operation S240 , a first evaluation result for the second database is obtained by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation index type with the standard value.

[0050] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the standard value may represent the evaluation value that the second database needs to achieve in order to meet application requirements for a certain evaluation indicator type, wherein a corresponding standard value is set for each evaluation indicator type.

[0051] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, for a certain evaluation index type, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type is compared with the standard value to determine whether the second database meets the application requirements for the evaluation index type, so that the first evaluation result for the second database can be obtained by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation index type with the standard value, that is, by integrating the evaluation index information of multiple evaluation index types, the second database is evaluated to obtain the first evaluation result for the second database. The first evaluation result can be used to characterize whether the second database meets the application requirements in the first database.

[0052] In operation S250 , when the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database, the second database is determined as the target database to be migrated.

[0053] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, when the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database, it can be determined that migrating the application data in the first database to the second database is theoretically feasible, and the second database can be determined as the target database to be migrated, so as to subsequently migrate the application data in the first database to the second database, that is, the first evaluation result for the second database obtained by the evaluation model is equivalent to the theoretical evaluation result.

[0054] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, when the first evaluation result indicates that the second database does not meet the requirements of the application in the first database, it can be determined that migrating the application data in the first database to the second database is theoretically not feasible, that is, the second database cannot be used as the database to be migrated.

[0055] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, based on the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type extracted from the first database and the second database for evaluating database migration, and through the evaluation model, the second database is evaluated from multiple evaluation indicator types such as database attributes and database processing performance, so as to comprehensively understand whether the second database can meet the needs of the application, accurately evaluate the feasibility and effect of the database migration plan, and effectively reduce the risk and uncertainty of database migration.

[0056] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the evaluation index information corresponding to the evaluation index type of the first database and the second database are jointly input into the evaluation model, and an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type is output, including: for each sub-indicator type, according to the information corresponding to the sub-indicator type of the first database and the second database, the indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type is calculated; based on the indicator score and weight corresponding to each sub-indicator type, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type is obtained.

[0057] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the evaluation index information corresponding to the evaluation index type includes information corresponding to each sub-index type, that is, the evaluation index type also includes multiple sub-index types.

[0058] The following are multiple sub-indicator types included in each evaluation indicator type: for the evaluation indicator type of database attributes, multiple sub-indicator types may include database name, database version, and database engine type; for the evaluation indicator type of database object attributes, multiple sub-indicator types may include database size, number of data tables, data table structure, number of indexes, index type, index size, index-associated data tables, index usage frequency, etc., where the data table structure may include the number of fields and field types, and the index type may include unique indexes and review indexes; for the evaluation indicator type of database processing performance, multiple sub-indicator types may include SQL statement execution time, number of SQL statement executions, SQL statement complexity, SQL statement optimization suggestions, and transaction processing performance; for the evaluation indicator type of database capacity level, multiple sub-indicator types may include the number of database connections, the number of concurrent connections, memory usage, CPU usage, disk space utilization, log recording, etc.; for the evaluation indicator type of database disaster recovery capability, multiple sub-indicator types may include data backup strategy, data recovery capability, database replication and synchronization, database abnormal event records, and database failure rate.

[0059] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, since each evaluation indicator type also includes multiple sub-indicator types, the indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type can be calculated based on the information corresponding to the sub-indicator type in the first database and the second database respectively, and the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type can be obtained based on the indicator score and weight corresponding to each sub-indicator type, so that the second database can be evaluated for the evaluation indicator type from multiple sub-indicator types based on the evaluation value.

[0060] For the evaluation indicator type of database attribute, this evaluation indicator type includes three sub-indicator types: database version, database engine type and database name.

[0061] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database version can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of errors related to the use of database features by applications under the second database. It can be expressed as the number of errors related to the use of database features by applications under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the version of the second database can support the functions and features required by the application in the first database.

[0062] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database engine type can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of errors related to the use of the database engine by the application under the second database. It can be expressed as the number of errors related to the use of the database engine by the application under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the engine type of the second database can meet the data processing requirements of the application in the first database.

[0063] The indicator score corresponding to the database name can be expressed as ,in, It can indicate the number of function errors reported by the first database application under the second database. It can indicate the number of function errors reported by the application in the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the second database can meet the application requirements and whether it is compatible with the first database.

[0064] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, based on the above ~ , the evaluation value corresponding to the database attribute = .in, It can represent the weight corresponding to the database version, It can represent the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database engine type. It can represent the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database name.

[0065] For the evaluation indicator type of database object properties, this evaluation indicator type includes several sub-indicator types: database size, number of data tables, data table structure, number of indexes, index type, index size, index-associated data tables, and index usage frequency.

[0066] Among them, the database size can be used to determine whether the second database can accommodate the amount of data applied in the first database; the number of data tables can be used to determine whether the second database can support the number of data tables of the application; the data table structure can be used to determine whether the data table structure of the second database is compatible with the first database, and whether the number and type of fields meet the requirements; the number of indexes can be used to determine whether the number of indexes of the second database can meet the query requirements of the application; the index type can be used to determine whether the index type supported by the second database can meet the index requirements of the application; the index size can be used to determine whether the index size of the second database is suitable for the data volume and query performance requirements of the application; the data table associated with the index can be used to determine whether the index is correctly associated with the corresponding data table; the index usage frequency can be used to determine whether the index usage frequency conforms to the query mode of the application.

[0067] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type of database object attribute = .in, ~ The indicator scores corresponding to multiple sub-indicator types under the evaluation indicator type of database object attribute can be represented in sequence; ~ It can represent the number of errors related to multiple sub-indicator types under the evaluation indicator type of database object attributes. ~ If the value of is greater than 100, take 100; ~ The weight corresponding to each sub-indicator type can be expressed in turn.

[0068] For the evaluation indicator type of database processing performance, this evaluation indicator type includes several sub-indicator types: SQL statement execution time, SQL statement execution times, SQL statement optimization suggestions, and transaction processing performance.

[0069] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of SQL statement execution time can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the average response time of the application executing the SQL statement under the second database. It can be expressed as the average response time of the application executing the SQL statement under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the response time of the second database executing the SQL statement meets the performance requirements of the application in the first database.

[0070] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of SQL statement execution times can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the average frequency of SQL statements executed by applications under the second database. It can be expressed as the average frequency of SQL statements executed by applications under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the frequency of executing SQL statements by the second database can meet the data processing requirements of the application.

[0071] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of SQL statement optimization suggestion can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of slow SQL statements in the second database. It can be expressed as the number of slow SQL statements in the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the second database provides optimization suggestions for SQL statements to improve performance.

[0072] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of transaction processing performance can be expressed as ,in, It can indicate the number of transaction consistency errors under the second data. It can indicate the number of transaction consistency errors in the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , it can be determined whether the transaction processing performance of the second database can meet the concurrent processing requirements of the application.

[0073] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, based on the above ~ , the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type of database processing performance = .

[0074] in, It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of SQL statement execution time. It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of the number of SQL statement executions. It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of optimization suggestion for SQL statements; It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of transaction processing performance.

[0075] For the evaluation indicator type of database capacity level, this evaluation indicator type includes several sub-indicator types: number of database connections, memory usage, CPU usage, disk space utilization and log recording.

[0076] The indicator score corresponding to the number of database connections can be expressed as ,in, It can indicate the number of errors when the maximum number of connections is reached in the second database. It can indicate the number of errors reported when the maximum number of connections is reached in the first database. , which can be used to determine whether the maximum number of connections supported by the second database can meet the concurrent access requirements of the application.

[0077] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of memory usage can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the memory usage of the second database. It can be expressed as the memory usage of the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the memory usage of the second database is stable and whether there are problems such as memory leaks.

[0078] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of CPU usage can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the CPU usage of the second database. It can be expressed as the CPU usage of the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the CPU usage of the second database is within a reasonable range.

[0079] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of disk space utilization can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the disk usage under the second data, It can be expressed as the disk usage of the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the disk space utilization of the second database is stable and whether there is a risk of insufficient disk space.

[0080] The indicator score corresponding to the log record situation can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of log information types under the second data, It can be expressed as the number of log information types under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the second database can record sufficient log information to facilitate troubleshooting and data recovery.

[0081] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, based on the above ~ , the evaluation value corresponding to the database capacity level = .

[0082] in, It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of the number of database connections. It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of memory usage. It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of CPU usage; It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of disk space utilization; It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of logging situation.

[0083] For the evaluation indicator type of database disaster recovery capability, this evaluation indicator type includes several sub-indicator types: data backup strategy, data recovery capability, database recovery and synchronization status, database abnormal event records, and database failure rate.

[0084] The indicator score corresponding to the data backup strategy can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of errors reported by the data backup strategy under the second database. It can be expressed as the number of errors reported by the data backup strategy under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the backup strategy of the second database can ensure the security and recoverability of the data.

[0085] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of data recovery capability can be expressed as ,in, It can represent the average time of data recovery in the second database. It can represent the average time of data recovery in the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , used to determine whether the data recovery capability of the second database can recover data in a timely and effective manner.

[0086] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database replication and synchronization can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of errors reported for database replication and synchronization under the second database. It can be expressed as the number of errors reported in database replication and synchronization under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the second database supports database replication and synchronization to ensure the real-time and consistency of data.

[0087] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database abnormal event record can be expressed as ,in, It can be expressed as the number of errors recorded in the database abnormal event under the second database. It can be expressed as the number of errors recorded in the database abnormal event under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , which can be used to determine whether the second database can record database abnormalities so as to facilitate timely discovery and handling of problems.

[0088] The indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database failure rate can be expressed as ,in, It can represent the failure rate under the second data, It can represent the failure rate under the first database. Based on the above indicator scores , used to determine whether the failure rate of the second database is lower than an acceptable level and whether the stability and reliability of the database can be guaranteed.

[0089] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, based on the above ~ , the evaluation value corresponding to the database disaster recovery capability = .

[0090] in, It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of data backup strategy. It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of data recovery capability. It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database replication and synchronization; It can be expressed as the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database abnormal event record; It can be expressed as a weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type of database failure rate.

[0091] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, the indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type ranges from 0 to 1; the weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type ranges from 0 to 1, and the sum of the weights corresponding to multiple sub-indicator types under a certain evaluation indicator type is 1, which is used to reflect the importance of the sub-indicator type in the evaluation. The weight corresponding to the sub-indicator type can be set according to the importance of the application's requirements for the database.

[0092] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, for each evaluation indicator type, based on the application's requirements for each sub-indicator type of the database, that is, the importance of each sub-indicator type in the evaluation, a corresponding weight is assigned to each sub-indicator type, so that based on the indicator score and the corresponding weight, an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is calculated to better reflect whether the second database meets the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type.

[0093] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation indicator type with the standard value, a first evaluation result for the second database is obtained, including: for each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is compared with the standard value to obtain a comparison result, wherein the standard value represents the evaluation value that the second database needs to achieve in order to meet application requirements for the evaluation indicator type; based on the comparison result corresponding to each evaluation indicator type, a first evaluation result for the second database is obtained.

[0094] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, each evaluation index type is set with a corresponding standard value, which represents the evaluation value that the second database needs to achieve for the evaluation index type to meet the application requirements. The standard value corresponding to the evaluation index type is set based on experience.

[0095] For example, for the evaluation indicator types of database attributes, database processing performance, database capacity level, and database disaster recovery capability, the corresponding standard value can be set to 0.5; for the evaluation indicator type of database object attributes, the corresponding standard value can be set to 0.8.

[0096] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, for each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is compared with the standard value to obtain a comparison result corresponding to the evaluation indicator type to determine whether the second database meets the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type.

[0097] Wherein, when the comparison result indicates that the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is greater than or equal to the standard value, it is determined that the second database can meet the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type. When the comparison result indicates that the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is less than the standard value, it is determined that the second database cannot meet the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type.

[0098] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the standard value is the minimum evaluation value required to determine whether the second database can meet the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type; the closer the evaluation value is to 1, the more the second database can meet the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type, and the better the migration capability of the second database; if the evaluation value is lower than the standard value, it means that the migration capability of the second database is insufficient, and the application's use of data needs to be re-examined, or the second database is not suitable for migration.

[0099] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, since different applications have different requirements for database emphasis, a first evaluation result for the second database can be obtained based on the comparison results corresponding to each evaluation indicator type and combined with the requirements of the corresponding application for database emphasis.

[0100] For example, when the application has relatively high requirements on the disaster recovery capability of the database, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type of database disaster recovery capability will be used as a more important reference value. The evaluation values ​​corresponding to other evaluation indicator types will also be used as a reference, but they are not the most important reference basis.

[0101] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, for each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type and the standard value are first compared to obtain a comparison result, so that based on the comparison result corresponding to each evaluation indicator type, a first evaluation result for the second database can be obtained, so as to evaluate whether the second database meets the application requirements from multiple angles from multiple evaluation indicator types to determine whether the second database is suitable for migration.

[0102] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, after migration based on the second database, the evaluation method of the above database also includes: evaluating the second database through chaos testing to obtain a second evaluation result; evaluating the second database through recording and playback operations to obtain a third evaluation result.

[0103] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, when it can be determined based on the first evaluation result that the second database theoretically meets the application requirements, the application data in the first database can be actually migrated to the second database.

[0104] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, since the first evaluation result is theoretically evaluated through the evaluation model, in order to reduce the risk and uncertainty of database migration, it is necessary to verify whether the second database really meets the application requirements after the actual migration. Therefore, by performing chaos testing as well as recording and playback operations on the first database and the second database, the second database after the actual migration can be evaluated to obtain the second evaluation result and the third evaluation result, so that it can be verified through the second evaluation result and the third evaluation result whether the second database after the actual migration really meets the requirements.

[0105] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the first evaluation result is a theoretical evaluation result generated based on an evaluation model. When the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the application requirements, the second database is actually migrated. After the migration, it can be evaluated from two aspects, chaos testing and recording playback, to determine whether the second database after the actual migration really meets the requirements.

[0106] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a second database is evaluated through chaos testing to obtain a second evaluation result, including: generating a chaos test case according to a test scenario and conditions, wherein the test scenario and conditions are set according to database information; calling a first database and a second database so that the first database and the second database respectively perform chaos testing according to the chaos test case to obtain test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively; and obtaining a second evaluation result for the second database according to the test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0107] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, for chaos testing, corresponding test scenarios and conditions can be set based on the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type in the database information, so that chaos test cases can be generated based on the corresponding test scenarios and conditions, that is, corresponding chaos test cases can be generated based on each evaluation indicator type.

[0108] Among them, the test scenarios and conditions include but are not limited to abnormal situations and extreme conditions; chaos test cases are used to simulate various abnormal situations and extreme conditions that may occur in the real environment.

[0109] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, for the evaluation indicator types of database properties, database processing performance, database capacity level and database disaster recovery capability, since the first database and the second database are involved, it is necessary to call the first database and the second database so that the first database and the second database respectively perform chaos testing according to the chaos test case to obtain the test results corresponding to the first database and the test results corresponding to the second database, so that the second evaluation result for the second database can be obtained based on the test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0110] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, for the evaluation indicator type of database object attributes, since it only involves the second database, it is only necessary to call the second database so that the second database performs chaos testing according to the chaos test case to obtain the test results corresponding to the second database, and thus based on the test results corresponding to the second database, the second evaluation result for the second database can be obtained.

[0111] Among them, the chaos test case is given to the first database or the second database, and the first database or the second database executes the chaos test according to the chaos test case to obtain the corresponding test result, which records various data and indicators in the test process, such as the response time, throughput, error rate, etc. of the database system.

[0112] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, in the case where a first database and a second database are involved, the test results of the first database and the second database are compared respectively, and a second evaluation result for the second database is obtained by judging whether the test results are consistent; in the case where only the second database is involved, a judgment is made based on the test results of the second database itself to obtain a second evaluation result for the second database.

[0113] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, based on the test scenarios and conditions set by the database information, chaos test cases are generated to enable the first database and the second database to perform chaos testing, so that based on the test results, a second evaluation result for the second database can be obtained. Based on the chaos test, various abnormal situations and extreme conditions can be simulated to comprehensively test the stability and fault tolerance of the second database, thereby improving the reliability and stability of the database migration solution.

[0114] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the second database is evaluated through recording and playback operations to obtain a third evaluation result, including: executing a recording process for database operations corresponding to the first database to obtain a recorded database operation process; obtaining a playback result by playing back the recorded database operation process in the second database; and obtaining a third evaluation result for the second database based on the recorded database operation process and the playback result.

[0115] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a recording process of database operations corresponding to a first database can be executed to obtain a recorded database operation process, and the recorded database operation process can be played back in a second database to obtain a playback result, so that the recorded database operation process and the playback result can be compared, and by determining whether the recorded database operation process and the playback result are consistent, a third evaluation result for the second database can be obtained.

[0116] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, after executing the chaos test on the first database and the second database, the first database and the second database may be recorded and replayed again, that is, the first database and the second database may continue to be recorded and replayed under various abnormal situations and extreme conditions, so that the effectiveness and reliability of the migration plan can be verified under abnormal situations and extreme conditions, so as to obtain a more accurate third evaluation result.

[0117] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, by recording and replaying the database operation process, the effectiveness and reliability of the migration solution are verified, which saves manpower and time costs and improves work efficiency and results.

[0118] Based on the above content, the evaluation model in the above operation S230 is a trained model. Before actually applying the evaluation model, the evaluation index information corresponding to the evaluation index type of the database to be migrated and the database to be migrated can be input into the initial model together to obtain the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation index type, and when the evaluation result obtained based on the evaluation value indicates that the database to be migrated meets the application requirements, the migration is actually carried out, and after migrating the application data in the database to be migrated to the database to be migrated, the two databases are actually evaluated by performing chaos testing, recording and playback operations on the two databases, and the corresponding evaluation results are obtained, so as to judge whether the evaluation result is consistent with the evaluation result before the actual migration. If not, the initial model is tuned until the evaluation result before migration obtained by the model is consistent with the evaluation result after the actual migration, and the final evaluation model can be obtained for the evaluation of database migration.

[0119] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the above-mentioned database evaluation method further includes: generating an evaluation test report for the second database according to the test results, the second evaluation results and the third evaluation results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0120] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, based on the test results, the second evaluation results, and the third evaluation results corresponding to the first database and the second database, an evaluation test report for the second database is generated. Based on the evaluation test report, it can be directly determined whether the second database after actual migration really meets the application requirements.

[0121] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the evaluation test report can also display the actual evaluation value for the second database, so as to compare it with the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation indicator type obtained through the evaluation model to see whether they are consistent. If not, it is necessary to adjust the application itself until the evaluation value is consistent to adapt to the second database so that it can finally be put into production.

[0122] According to the embodiments of the present disclosure, since an evaluation test report is generated based on the test results and evaluation results, it can intuitively display whether the second database really meets the application requirements for each evaluation indicator type, which facilitates the evaluation and suggestions on the stability and performance of the database migration to ensure that the application is adapted to the second database.

[0123] Figure 3 A system diagram for executing a database evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown.

[0124] like Figure 3 As shown, the system includes an evaluation index selection device 310, a chaos test tool device 320 and a database recording and playback device 330. Among them, the evaluation index selection device 310 includes a data acquisition unit, an analysis and processing unit, a model construction unit and a verification unit; the chaos test tool device 320 includes a test scenario setting unit, a test case generation unit, a test execution unit and a result analysis unit; the database recording and playback device 330 includes a recording control unit, a recording unit, a storage unit, a playback control unit and a playback unit.

[0125] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the data acquisition unit is used to perform the above operation S210, the analysis and processing unit is used to perform the above operation S220, and the model building unit is used to perform the above operation S230, so as to obtain evaluation values ​​corresponding to each evaluation indicator type to determine whether the second database can meet the application requirements.

[0126] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, when the second database meets the application requirements and the application data in the first database is migrated to the second database, a chaos test is performed using a chaos testing tool device 320 to obtain a second evaluation result; and a database recording and playback device 330 is used to perform recording and playback operations to obtain a third evaluation result.

[0127] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a test scenario setting unit is used to set test scenarios and conditions, including abnormal situations and extreme conditions, etc.; a test case generation unit is used to automatically generate chaos test cases according to the set test scenarios and conditions to simulate various abnormal situations and extreme conditions that may occur in a real environment; a test execution unit is used to execute a chaos test process, i.e., calling the first database and the second database, and recording various data and indicators in the test process to obtain test results, such as the response time, throughput, error rate, etc. of the database system.

[0128] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the recording control unit is responsible for starting and stopping the recording process, and controlling the behavior of the recording unit, such as starting recording, stopping recording, etc.; the playback control unit is responsible for starting and stopping the playback process, and controlling the behavior of the playback unit, such as starting playback, stopping playback, etc.; the recording unit actually executes the recording process of database operations on the first database, and stores the recorded data to the storage unit for use in subsequent playback processes; the playback unit is used to perform playback operations in the second database based on the recorded data to verify the effectiveness and reliability of the migration plan.

[0129] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the result analysis unit is used to generate an evaluation test report for the second database according to the test results, the second evaluation results and the third evaluation results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0130] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the verification unit is used to verify the model through the test results of the chaos test and the results of the recording and playback operations, evaluate the accuracy and applicability of the model, and thus adjust and optimize the model, and finally obtain the evaluation model in operation S230.

[0131] Based on the above system, the system integrates the evaluation index selection device, chaos test tool device and database recording and playback tool device. Through the scientific selection of evaluation index information, model construction and verification, chaos testing and database operation recording and playback, the system comprehensively evaluates and tests the performance, stability and reliability of heterogeneous databases, helps users reduce the risk and uncertainty of database migration, improves the efficiency and success rate of migration work, and thus provides users with comprehensive migration plan evaluation and testing support. The system has the advantages of comprehensive evaluation, reliable testing and high efficiency, and can provide effective technical means and solutions for database migration.

[0132] Based on the above database evaluation method, the present disclosure also provides a database evaluation device. Figure 4 The device is described in detail.

[0133] Figure 4 The structural block diagram of the database evaluation device according to the embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown.

[0134] like Figure 4 As shown, the database evaluation device 400 of this embodiment includes a collection module 410 , an extraction module 420 , an input module 430 , a comparison module 440 and a determination module 450 .

[0135] The acquisition module 410 is used to acquire database information of the first database and the second database, wherein the first database stores application data to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database of application data to be migrated into the first database. In one embodiment, the acquisition module 410 can be used to perform the operation S210 described above, which will not be repeated here.

[0136] The extraction module 420 is used to extract evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type from the database information of each of the first database and the second database, wherein the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type is used to evaluate database migration. In one embodiment, the extraction module 420 can be used to perform the operation S220 described above, which will not be repeated here.

[0137] The input module 430 is used to input the evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type of the first database and the second database into the evaluation model for each evaluation indicator type, and output the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type. In one embodiment, the input module 430 can be used to perform the operation S230 described above, which will not be repeated here.

[0138] The comparison module 440 is used to obtain a first evaluation result for the second database by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation index type with the standard value. In one embodiment, the comparison module 440 can be used to perform the operation S240 described above, which will not be described in detail here.

[0139] The determination module 450 is used to determine the second database as the target database to be migrated if the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database. In one embodiment, the determination module 450 can be used to perform the operation S250 described above, which will not be repeated here.

[0140] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the input module 430 includes a calculating unit and a first obtaining unit.

[0141] The calculation unit is used to calculate, for each sub-indicator type, the indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type according to the information corresponding to the sub-indicator type in the first database and the second database respectively.

[0142] The first obtaining unit is used to obtain an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type based on the indicator score and weight corresponding to each sub-indicator type.

[0143] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the comparison module 440 includes a comparison unit and a second obtaining unit.

[0144] The comparison unit is used to compare the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation indicator type with the standard value to obtain a comparison result, wherein the standard value represents the evaluation value that the second database needs to achieve in order to meet the application requirements for the evaluation indicator type.

[0145] The second obtaining unit is used to obtain a first evaluation result for the second database based on the comparison result corresponding to each evaluation indicator type.

[0146] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, after migration is performed based on the second database, the database evaluation device 400 further includes a first evaluation module and a second evaluation module.

[0147] The first evaluation module is used to evaluate the second database through chaos testing to obtain a second evaluation result.

[0148] The second evaluation module is used to evaluate the second database through recording and playback operations to obtain a third evaluation result.

[0149] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the first evaluation module includes a generating unit, a calling unit and a third obtaining unit.

[0150] The generating unit is used to generate chaos test cases according to the test scenarios and conditions, wherein the test scenarios and conditions are set according to the database information.

[0151] The calling unit is used to call the first database and the second database so that the first database and the second database respectively perform chaos testing according to chaos test cases to obtain test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0152] The third obtaining unit is used to obtain a second evaluation result for the second database according to the test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0153] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the second evaluation module includes a recording module, a playback module and a fourth obtaining unit.

[0154] The recording unit is used to perform a recording process of a database operation corresponding to the first database to obtain a recorded database operation process.

[0155] The playback unit is used to obtain a playback result by playing back the recorded database operation process in the second database.

[0156] The fourth obtaining unit is used to obtain a third evaluation result for the second database according to the recorded database operation process and the playback result.

[0157] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the database evaluation device 400 further includes a generation module.

[0158] The generating module is used to generate an evaluation test report for the second database according to the test results, the second evaluation results and the third evaluation results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

[0159] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, any multiple modules of the acquisition module 410, the extraction module 420, the input module 430, the comparison module 440 and the determination module 450 can be combined in one module for implementation, or any one of the modules can be split into multiple modules. Alternatively, at least part of the functions of one or more of these modules can be combined with at least part of the functions of other modules and implemented in one module. According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, at least one of the acquisition module 410, the extraction module 420, the input module 430, the comparison module 440 and the determination module 450 can be at least partially implemented as a hardware circuit, such as a field programmable gate array (FPGA), a programmable logic array (PLA), a system on a chip, a system on a substrate, a system on a package, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or can be implemented by hardware or firmware such as any other reasonable way of integrating or packaging the circuit, or implemented in any one of the three implementation methods of software, hardware and firmware or in a suitable combination of any of them. Alternatively, at least one of the acquisition module 410 , the extraction module 420 , the input module 430 , the comparison module 440 and the determination module 450 may be at least partially implemented as a computer program module, and when the computer program module is executed, a corresponding function may be performed.

[0160] Figure 5 A block diagram of an electronic device suitable for implementing a database evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is schematically shown.

[0161] like Figure 5As shown, the electronic device 500 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure includes a processor 501, which can perform various appropriate actions and processes according to a program stored in a read-only memory (ROM) 502 or a program loaded from a storage part 508 to a random access memory (RAM) 503. The processor 501 may include, for example, a general-purpose microprocessor (such as a CPU), an instruction set processor and / or a related chipset and / or a special-purpose microprocessor (for example, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC)), etc. The processor 501 may also include an onboard memory for caching purposes. The processor 501 may include a single processing unit or multiple processing units for performing different actions of the method flow according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0162] In RAM 503, various programs and data required for the operation of electronic device 500 are stored. Processor 501, ROM 502 and RAM 503 are connected to each other via bus 504. Processor 501 performs various operations of the method flow according to the embodiment of the present disclosure by executing the program in ROM 502 and / or RAM 503. It should be noted that the program can also be stored in one or more memories other than ROM 502 and RAM 503. Processor 501 can also perform various operations of the method flow according to the embodiment of the present disclosure by executing the program stored in the one or more memories.

[0163] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the electronic device 500 may further include an input / output (I / O) interface 505, which is also connected to the bus 504. The electronic device 500 may further include one or more of the following components connected to the input / output (I / O) interface 505: an input portion 506 including a keyboard, a mouse, etc.; an output portion 507 including a cathode ray tube (CRT), a liquid crystal display (LCD), etc., and a speaker, etc.; a storage portion 508 including a hard disk, etc.; and a communication portion 509 including a network interface card such as a LAN card, a modem, etc. The communication portion 509 performs communication processing via a network such as the Internet. A drive 510 is also connected to the input / output (I / O) interface 505 as needed. A removable medium 511, such as a magnetic disk, an optical disk, a magneto-optical disk, a semiconductor memory, etc., is installed on the drive 510 as needed, so that a computer program read therefrom is installed into the storage portion 508 as needed.

[0164] The present disclosure also provides a computer-readable storage medium, which may be included in the device / apparatus / system described in the above embodiments; or may exist independently without being assembled into the device / apparatus / system. The above computer-readable storage medium carries one or more programs, and when the above one or more programs are executed, the method according to the embodiment of the present disclosure is implemented.

[0165] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the computer-readable storage medium may be a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium, for example, it may include but is not limited to: a portable computer disk, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), a portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination thereof. In the present disclosure, a computer-readable storage medium may be any tangible medium containing or storing a program, which may be used by or in combination with an instruction execution system, an apparatus or a device. For example, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the computer-readable storage medium may include the ROM 502 and / or RAM 503 described above and / or one or more memories other than ROM 502 and RAM 503.

[0166] The embodiment of the present disclosure also includes a computer program product, which includes a computer program, and the computer program contains program code for executing the method shown in the flowchart. When the computer program product is run in a computer system, the program code is used to enable the computer system to implement the database evaluation method provided by the embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0167] The above functions defined in the system / device of the embodiment of the present disclosure are performed when the computer program is executed by the processor 501. According to the embodiment of the present disclosure, the system, device, module, unit, etc. described above can be implemented by a computer program module.

[0168] In one embodiment, the computer program may rely on tangible storage media such as optical storage devices, magnetic storage devices, etc. In another embodiment, the computer program may also be transmitted and distributed in the form of signals on a network medium, and downloaded and installed through the communication part 509, and / or installed from the removable medium 511. The program code contained in the computer program may be transmitted using any appropriate network medium, including but not limited to: wireless, wired, etc., or any suitable combination of the above.

[0169] In such an embodiment, the computer program can be downloaded and installed from the network through the communication part 509, and / or installed from the removable medium 511. When the computer program is executed by the processor 501, the above functions defined in the system of the embodiment of the present disclosure are performed. According to the embodiment of the present disclosure, the system, device, means, module, unit, etc. described above can be implemented by a computer program module.

[0170] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the program code for executing the computer program provided by the embodiment of the present disclosure can be written in any combination of one or more programming languages. Specifically, these computing programs can be implemented using high-level process and / or object-oriented programming languages, and / or assembly / machine languages. Programming languages ​​include, but are not limited to, Java, C++, python, "C" language or similar programming languages. The program code can be executed entirely on the user computing device, partially on the user device, partially on the remote computing device, or entirely on the remote computing device or server. In the case of a remote computing device, the remote computing device can be connected to the user computing device through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or can be connected to an external computing device (for example, using an Internet service provider to connect through the Internet).

[0171] The flow charts and block diagrams in the accompanying drawings illustrate the possible architecture, functions and operations of the systems, methods and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. In this regard, each box in the flow chart or block diagram can represent a module, a program segment, or a part of a code, and the above-mentioned module, program segment, or a part of a code contains one or more executable instructions for realizing the specified logical function. It should also be noted that in some alternative implementations, the functions marked in the box can also occur in a different order from the order marked in the accompanying drawings. For example, two boxes represented in succession can actually be executed substantially in parallel, and they can sometimes be executed in the opposite order, depending on the functions involved. It should also be noted that each box in the block diagram or flow chart, and the combination of the boxes in the block diagram or flow chart can be implemented with a dedicated hardware-based system that performs a specified function or operation, or can be implemented with a combination of dedicated hardware and computer instructions.

[0172] It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the features described in the various embodiments of the present disclosure may be combined and / or combined in a variety of ways, even if such combinations or combinations are not explicitly described in the present disclosure. In particular, without departing from the spirit and teachings of the present disclosure, the features described in the various embodiments of the present disclosure may be combined and / or combined in a variety of ways. All of these combinations and / or combinations fall within the scope of the present disclosure.

[0173] The embodiments of the present disclosure are described above. However, these embodiments are only for illustrative purposes and are not intended to limit the scope of the present disclosure. Although the embodiments are described above, this does not mean that the measures in the various embodiments cannot be used in combination to advantage. Without departing from the scope of the present disclosure, those skilled in the art may make a variety of substitutions and modifications, which should all fall within the scope of the present disclosure.

Claims

1. A database evaluation method, characterized in that: include: Collecting database information of a first database and a second database, wherein the first database stores application data to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database for application data to be migrated into the first database; Extracting evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type from database information of each of the first database and the second database, respectively, wherein the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type is used to evaluate database migration; For each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type in the first database and the second database is input into the evaluation model, and the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is output; Obtaining a first evaluation result for the second database by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation indicator type with the standard value; and When the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database, the second database is determined as the target database to be migrated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type includes information corresponding to each sub-indicator type, and the evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type of the first database and the second database is input into the evaluation model together, and the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is output, including: For each sub-indicator type, calculating the indicator score corresponding to the sub-indicator type according to the information corresponding to the sub-indicator type in the first database and the second database; and Based on the indicator score and weight corresponding to each of the sub-indicator types, an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is obtained.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The obtaining of a first evaluation result for the second database by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation indicator type with the standard value includes: For each evaluation indicator type, the evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type is compared with the standard value to obtain a comparison result, wherein the standard value represents the evaluation value that the second database needs to achieve for satisfying application requirements for the evaluation indicator type; Based on the comparison results corresponding to each of the evaluation indicator types, a first evaluation result for the second database is obtained.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that After performing migration based on the second database, the method further includes: Evaluate the second database through a chaos test to obtain a second evaluation result; The second database is evaluated through recording and playback operations to obtain a third evaluation result.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The second database is evaluated by the chaos test to obtain a second evaluation result, including: Generate a chaos test case according to the test scenario and conditions, wherein the test scenario and conditions are set according to the database information; Calling the first database and the second database so that the first database and the second database respectively perform chaos testing according to the chaos test case, and obtaining test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively; A second evaluation result for the second database is obtained according to the test results corresponding to the first database and the second database respectively.

6. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The step of evaluating the second database through recording and playback operations to obtain a third evaluation result includes: Execute a recording process of a database operation corresponding to the first database to obtain a recorded database operation process; Obtaining a playback result by playing back the recorded database operation process in the second database; and A third evaluation result for the second database is obtained according to the recorded database operation process and the playback result.

7. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that The method further comprises: An evaluation test report for the second database is generated according to the test results corresponding to the first database and the second database, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

8. A database evaluation device, characterized in that: The device comprises: A collection module, used to collect database information of a first database and a second database, wherein the first database stores application data to be migrated, and the second database is a candidate database for application data to be migrated into the first database; An extraction module, used to extract evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type from the database information of the first database and the second database, respectively, wherein the evaluation indicator information corresponding to each evaluation indicator type is used to evaluate database migration; An input module, for inputting, for each evaluation indicator type, evaluation indicator information corresponding to the evaluation indicator type in the first database and the second database into an evaluation model, and outputting an evaluation value corresponding to the evaluation indicator type; a comparison module, configured to obtain a first evaluation result for the second database by comparing the evaluation value corresponding to each evaluation indicator type with a standard value; and A determination module is used to determine that the second database is a target database to be migrated if the first evaluation result indicates that the second database meets the requirements of the application in the first database.

9. An electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; a memory for storing one or more computer programs, It is characterized in that the one or more processors execute the one or more computer programs to implement the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program or instruction stored thereon, characterized in that: When the computer program or instruction is executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 are implemented.

11. A computer program product comprising a computer program or instructions, characterized in that When the computer program or instruction is executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 are implemented.

Images