The evolution of the Information age demanded robust management systems for storing large volume of data, efficiency In retrieval, and enhanced data security and sharing; hence, the development of databases from flat file systems. Despite this advancement in technology, many organizations such as Colorado Financial Reporting System (COFFS) continue to use legacy database systems.
Colorado Financial Reporting System (COFFS) The Colorado Financial Reporting System (COFFS) Is an accounting system in the state of Colorado, which Is responsible for storing records and processes annual expenditures (Russell, 2012). Russell (2012) opines that the COFFS Is an aging legacy system that utilizes outdated technology in which the complexity of the programming structure is difficult to maintain, and costly to support the system.
Benefits and Drawbacks of Continued use of the Legacy Database Based on the nature of the COFFS, the state of Colorado needs to discontinue the use of this legacy system. The benefits of continuing to use a legacy database within a business are to keep the system as a backup system or for specified business operational processes (Line, 2008). However, with the continued use of the legacy database of the COFFS by the state of Colorado, there are possible drawbacks. These drawbacks include redundant data, inconsistency in data formatting, and the inability to share data among other departments.
Russell (2012) states that potential failures of the legacy system are detrimental, expensive to maintain due to outdated technology, and difficult to support based on the complexity of the database design The Database Models and the COFFS For efficiency and Improved productivity, It Is essential that COFFS reduce the risk ND cost of its operation and the state’s ability to enhance financial control, reporting, and forecasting (Russell, 2012). The COFFS main responsibility is processing annual expenditure across the state.
It is imperative that this system provides accurate, efficient reports based on request, control all the financial operational processes, make predictions based on the data, and Increase the overall operational productivity. There are various benefits and Limitations of each model based on the needs of the system. The hierarchical model uses a parent-child organizational Truckee (People, 2009), which could benefit the COFFS providing simplicity, varying degree of security features, increased performance In managing records, and promote database integrity (Thacker, n. . ). However, the limitations in using the hierarchical model include the complexity of implementing the database model, the inability to manage redundant data to enable synchronization (People, 2009) and the existence of structural dependency. People (2009) opines that the network model provides more flexibility than the hierarchical model modeling a many-to-many data relationship. The network model benefits are promoting data integrity, allows data independence, the flexibility of accessing data, enables more relationship type, and enhanced conceptual simplicity.
Comparatively, People (2009) states that the limitations of the network model are it are expensive to maintain, inflexible, and is a grouped in relations (People, 2009). The benefits of the relational model are the elimination of data redundancy, reduction of data inconsistency within records, ease of maintaining security, ease of modification, allows the use of data manipulation language for querying, and it is simplistic (Chafer, 2013). However, the drawbacks include machine performance, which affects large volume of data and physical storage consumption (Chafer, 2013).
The object oriented (00) database model is suitable for managing non-scalar data such as graphics, pictures, voice and text among others (People, 2009). People (2009) states that the benefits of the 00 database model include ease of use and the ability to map complex data types easily. Comparatively, this model lacks the capability to perform ad-hoc query (People, 2009). Recommendation for COFFS Regarding the needs of the COFFS, it is imperative that the state of Colorado upgrades the system to enhance efficiency and overall productivity of the aging legacy system.
The existing system is risk prone, and possible failure off part of the system or the entire system can severely affect the operational processes and functionalities of the system. Based on the existing system, it is recommended to upgrade the current system to a relational database model to enhance the efficiency of the system. This model can aid accurate reporting and forecasting of the system with the capability of using data manipulation language for querying to enhance rearing providing flexible ad-hoc data retrieval, ease of implementing the system and representing the data in a set of relational tables, and allows modifiability.
Despite the limitations with performances, effective use of indexing and different optimization actions can help to minimize these concerns. Conclusion Legacy systems have plagued many businesses and agencies despite the advancement in technology globally. Within the state of Colorado, the Colorado Financial Reporting System is an aging legacy system that has severely affected the operational processes and functionality of the system. Essentially, discontinuing the cagey system within the COFFS and upgrading to a relational database design would enhance the overall productivity of the system.