As more infrastructure and applications are experiencing a shift towards cloud in reinforcing digital transformation, one of the most critical decisions that enterprises must make well ahead of time is the best approach to cloud migration for the long-term success of their enterprises.
As per the survey conducted by Netscouts in 2018, majority of the enterprise, i.e., 56% of respondents had already started workload migration. Besides, there were 14% respondents who were in the planning stage and rest 15% had plans to carry out the migration process in less than 6 months to 1 year.
And as apparent that there’s no one-sit-fits-all answer; up-front planning would make the migration process easier, and rather the whole cloud transition smoother.
So which is the best cloud migration approach for your business?
This blog takes a look at the three distinct migration approaches to help you choose the right one.
Additionally, this report also predicts that 80% of the companies are feeling the need to move their workloads to the cloud as soon as possible. And although there are multiple approaches for the same, but we will discuss the three most common here. Naturally, there are benefits and disadvantages to each:
Rehosting or the lift and shift approach is a forklift approach to migrate applications to the cloud without any modifications in the code. The approach involves lifting either some part of the whole application from on-premise or existing cloud environment to a new cloud environment.
Currently, it is considered as the most common migration methods. It comprises 40% of all migrations because of its agility, simplicity, and speed in comparison to re-platforming and refactoring.
This is beneficial for the large enterprises who want to migrate quickly with minimal or no disturbance in the existing application workflow.
And once the migration is done, it becomes quite easier for them to optimize the applications as they are already done away with the difficult part.
“This works best for organizations looking to reduce their on-premises infrastructure expenses immediately”
Here are some common instances when enterprises should choose the rehosting approach-
The benefits of the lift-and-shift approach are-
“The rehosting method does not let you reap benefits from the native cloud functionality and tools like elasticity”
The rehosting approach works because it is simpler in terms of migration. However, it involves risks and limitations with it-
When you migrate an application, you also inherit the operating system, generally undocumented configurations, and non-cloud people and processes with it. So, if these processes are not clearly understood pre-migration, this will lead to a fragile application and a brittle end product.
The rehosting method does not let you reap benefits from the native cloud functionality and tools like elasticity. The app functions the way it should in a single physical server but does not let you to take advantage of added flexibility and scalability offered by cloud environments.
Simply copy-pasting the applications and data without understanding what’s in them implies that you are pulling out everything into the cloud, including malware or insecure configurations.
There are always post-rehosting activities that need to be taken care of. This involves additional cost beyond the basic migration process, in regards to money, time, and resources. These activities, if avoided, will prove costly in the long run, with high expenditure incurred on over-provisioned resources.
If the application is facing problem outside the cloud, known or unknown, Rehosting will likely bring that problem to the cloud. Retiring technical debt is a big plus of more advanced migration methods like Replatforming and Refactoring or drop-and-shop technique of Repurchasing.
In replatforming migration, a part of the application or the entire application is optimized with a small amount of up-versioning in API before moving to the cloud.
This varies from adding one or two functionalities to it to completely re-architecturing them before they can be rehosted or refactored and eventually deployed to the cloud.
“Developers can also reuse the resources they are accustomed to working with”
The replatforming approach ensures an interim solution between rehosting and refactoring, allowing workloads to take advantage of base cloud functionality and cost optimization, without the level of resource commitment required.
Developers can also reuse the resources they are accustomed to working with, such as legacy programming languages, development frameworks, and existing caches in the application.
Replatforming can be used to add new features for better scaling and leveraging the reserved resources of your cloud environment. There are even ways to integrate the app with native features of the cloud while little or no code modifications.
Take a look at these scenarios when to opt for this approach-
“Replatforming allows you to reshape them to make it compatible with the cloud”
“Enterprises can leverage cloud-native functionalities without worrying about the risk, complexity, cost, and time of a full refactor”
Replatforming is a cost-efficient solution. It is an optimal place of action between rehosting and refactoring, where enterprises can leverage cloud-native functionalities without worrying about the risk, complexity, cost, and time of a full refactor.
This approach does not require to adjust the cloud server to match the previous environment. Instead, you have the flexibility to start small and scale up as needed, which indicates that you can save a lot while the cloud environment grows with the app itself.
Its benefits include-
“If the cloud service used to replace a component is inappropriate or poorly configured, then the re-platform migration can go wrong”.
The major risk associated with re-platforming is that the project scope can grow and change if unchecked during the process, to become a complete refactor. Managing scope and avoiding unnecessary changes is key to mitigate this risk.
Secondly, if the cloud service used to replace a component is inappropriate or poorly configured, the replatform migration can go wrong.
Other limitations include:
A summary of the pros and cons of each approach include:
Pros |
Cons |
|
Lift-and-Shift |
|
|
Partial Refactor |
|
|
Complete Refactor |
|
|
Refactoring is a bit more complex than the other two as while making changes to the code in the application, it must be ensured that they do not impact the external behavior of the application. For example, if your existing application is resource-intensive, it may cause larger cloud billing because it involves big data processing or image rendering. In that case, redesigning the application for a better resource utilization is required before moving to the cloud.
This approach is the most time- consuming and resource-demanding, yet it can offer the lowest monthly spend of the three approaches. And also the full potential of cloud to increase performance, resilience, and responsiveness.
Refactoring comes in handy for the enterprises in the following scenarios-
“Refactoring method helps in reducing cost and improvements in operations, resilience, responsiveness, and security”
Further, you have the option to choose between partial or complete refactor, depending upon your needs. Partial refactor involves modification of the small part of the application which results in faster migration compared to complete refactor.
The benefits of refactoring are observed in the future. The current application and its environment configuration determine the complexity of refactoring, and that impacts the time-to-value from the project.
Its benefits include:
“This approach ensures an over-time reduction in costs, matching resource consumption with the demand, and eliminating the waste”
The limitations are here-
Refactoring is a complex process but it is well worth the results and improvement that you get in return. It is a resource-demanding process, one that requires plenty of time to complete. Some companies even go as far as refactoring parts of their business solutions to make the whole process more manageable. This compartmentalization could also lead to refactoring becoming longer and more resource exhausting.
Which one is the best approach?
There is no absolute answer to the question, especially since different use cases require different things. Picking one among the three approaches is a matter of finding the best that suits your specific needs. That said, start by checking if the app can be moved to a cloud environment in its entirety while maintaining cost and keeping operational efficiency in check. If the answer is yes, start with the rehost method.
The same approach goes for refactoring. If you have enough time and resources to complete a full refactor of your current solutions, then take SaaS and other alternate solutions into consideration.
Nevertheless, you can certainly take most of the hassle out of moving to the cloud with the right cloud migration strategy. You can then devote yourself to finding new resources to use, better flexibility to benefit from, and a more effective environment for your apps.
Take account of these points in mind, and you’ll be able to find the best approach out of these. However, there is no defined path to success. Your organization needs may vary and delve you into adopting a combination of these approaches, i.e. hybrid approach.
For example, it is possible that after conducting a migration analysis for your organization, it is determined that:
What is important in the end is to plan and roll out your migration plan by conducting a thorough analysis of your complete IT system, your infrastructure, and your application workload.
This assessment will help you determine which strategy to use and which part(s) should be moved to the cloud.