JP2015114794A - Information processing system and conversion evaluation method - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To efficiently evaluate a conversion result.SOLUTION: An information processing system having an information processing device which evaluates a result of conversion from a first data group to a second data group, comprises: consistency determination means which determines consistency between associated data items in the second data groups after conversion, on the basis of preset conversion conditions; and evaluation means which evaluates a detail of the conversion on the basis of a result of determination acquired by the consistency determination means.

Description

  The present application relates to an information processing system and a conversion evaluation method.

  For example, when a data group held in one system is used in another system, or when a new system is constructed from one system, the data structure between systems is different and data conversion may be required. is there. In addition, it is necessary to check the consistency of data before and after conversion. 2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, a system for converting program sources and data having different representation formats into specifications of program sources and data having a desired format is known (see, for example, Patent Document 1).

  However, in the method of Patent Document 1 described above, all data can be compared when the data volume to be converted is small. However, if the target data is enormous, whether or not the conversion is appropriately performed. The evaluation process takes time.

  In one aspect, the present invention aims to evaluate the conversion result efficiently.

  In one mode, it is an information processing system which has an information processor which evaluates the result of having converted the 1st data group into the 2nd data group, Comprising: Based on preset conversion conditions, the 2nd after conversion Consistency determining means for determining consistency between data items associated with each other in the data group, and evaluation means for evaluating the contents of the conversion based on a determination result obtained by the consistency determining means. .

  It is possible to evaluate the conversion result efficiently.

It is a figure which shows schematic structure of the conversion evaluation system which concerns on this embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of a function structure of a management terminal. It is a figure which shows an example of the hardware constitutions of a management terminal. It is a flowchart which shows an example of a conversion evaluation process. It is a figure for demonstrating the outline | summary of consistency judgment. It is a figure for demonstrating the outline | summary of input value judgment. It is a figure for demonstrating the outline | summary of an abnormal value judgment. It is a figure for demonstrating the outline | summary of sampling judgment. It is a figure for demonstrating the outline | summary of output judgment.

  Next, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail.

<System configuration>
FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a schematic configuration of a conversion evaluation system according to the present embodiment. As shown in FIG. 1, a conversion evaluation system 1 as an example of an information processing system includes a management terminal 10 as an example of an information processing apparatus and a first server 20 via a network N typified by the Internet, for example. And the second server 30 are connected. The network N may be wired or wireless. Further, the number of devices shown in FIG. 1 is not limited to this.

  The management terminal 10 shown in FIG. 1 is operated by a user such as an administrator, for example, and is realized by a general-purpose computer such as a PC (Personal Computer).

  The first server 20 executes a predetermined system (first system) using data before conversion (first data group).

  The second server 30 uses a predetermined system (second data group) using data (second data group) after the first data group used by the first server 20 is converted into a data group having a different data structure, for example. Execute the second system).

  Examples of the predetermined system described above include a production management system and a merchandise management system, but are not limited thereto. In the following description, an example will be described in which data consistency before and after conversion is appropriately evaluated for data conversion that occurs during data migration work (system update) from the first system to the second system.

  For example, in the conversion evaluation system 1, the management terminal 10 acquires the master layout information held by the second server 30, and converts the first data group held by the first server 20 based on the layout information. The second data group is input to the second server 30. The management terminal 10 uses the rule information (conversion condition) defined in advance for the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30, between the data items associated in the second data group. Judge the consistency of.

  As a result, the management terminal 10 efficiently converts the first data group held by the first server 20 as the second data group held by the second server 30 or efficiently evaluates the conversion result. It becomes possible. The function in the management terminal 10 may be included in the first server 20 or the second server 30. In that case, in the first server 20 or the second server 30, in the present embodiment. The conversion result is evaluated.

<Functional configuration of management terminal 10>
FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of a functional configuration of the management terminal. As shown in FIG. 2, the management terminal 10 includes a layout conversion unit 11, a consistency determination unit 12, an input value determination unit 13, an abnormal value determination unit 14, a sampling determination unit 15, and an output comparison unit 16. And evaluation means 17, notification means 18, and storage means 19.

  When the layout conversion unit 11 acquires the first data group held by the first server 20, the layout conversion unit 11 converts (converts) the first data group based on the master layout information of the second server 30, and the second data group The data is input to the second server 30 as a data group.

  When the consistency determining unit 12 acquires the rule information defined in advance from the storage unit 19, the consistency determining unit 12 associates the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30 in the second data group. Judge consistency between data items. The consistency determination means 12 uses the second data group based on rule information defined between files (for example, master) such as “the value of the item A of the file X is registered in the item B of the file Y”. Judgment is made on the consistency between the data items associated with the files that make up the.

  The input value determining means 13 determines whether or not an input value of a data item selected in advance is input for each file constituting the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30. The data item selected in advance is, for example, an item that is indispensable for managing work or executing a specific process, but is not limited to this, and may be an item specified in advance by the user. good.

  The abnormal value determination unit 14 obtains the data distribution of the input values of the data items (for example, main items) selected in advance for each file constituting the second data group for which the update processing has been executed by the second server 30. Then, it is determined whether there is an abnormal value as an input value from the acquired data distribution. For example, the abnormal value determination unit 14 aggregates input values of each data for the main item, and determines whether or not an abnormal numerical value is included in the distribution of the aggregated results.

  For example, when the unit of a data item of the original data (first data group) is “kg” and the unit of the corresponding data item of the converted data (second data group) is “g” Since the appropriate unit conversion is not performed, the numerical value becomes a huge value. The abnormal value determination means 14 determines whether there is such an abnormal value from the distribution of the collected results.

  In order to cope with a variety of conversion conditions, the sampling determination means 15 extracts data items for checking consistency as sampling data based on, for example, a business viewpoint or system specifications, and determines consistency with the extracted data. To do. Sampling determination means 15 uses, as sampling data, for example, a data item of a first data group held by first server 20 and a plurality of data items of a second data group that has been updated by second server 30. The data corresponding to and is extracted and its consistency is judged.

  The output comparison unit 16 uses data obtained by a predetermined process (for example, periodic ordering process) using the first data group by the first server 20 and the second data group by the second server 30. Compared with the data obtained by the same processing (for example, periodic order processing).

  The evaluation unit 17 is based on a result obtained from at least one of the consistency determination unit 12, the input value determination unit 13, the abnormal value determination unit 14, the sampling determination unit 15, and the output comparison unit 16. , Evaluate the conversion results.

  The evaluation unit 17 may perform evaluation based on a preset order, and may determine whether to perform further evaluation based on the evaluation result. For example, when the evaluation unit 17 first executes the consistency determination unit 12 and determines that there is an abnormality in the conversion, the input value determination unit 13, the abnormal value determination unit 14, the sampling determination unit 15, the output comparison unit 16, and the like The evaluation result may be output without performing the above process.

  The notification means 18 notifies the evaluation result by the evaluation means 17 to a user such as an administrator. The notification means 18 may notify the result obtained from each of the consistency determination means 12, the input value determination means 13, the abnormal value determination means 14, the sampling determination means 15, and the output comparison means 16. The overall evaluation result based on these results may be notified.

  The storage unit 19 stores layout information 19A for storing the master layout information of the second server 30 and rule information 19B for storing predefined rule information, but is not limited thereto.

<Hardware configuration example of the management terminal 10>
FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of the management terminal. As illustrated in FIG. 3, the management terminal 10 includes a control unit 41, a main storage unit 42, an auxiliary storage unit 43, an external storage device I / F unit 44, and a network I / F unit 45.

  The control unit 41 is a CPU (Central Processing Unit) that controls each device, calculates data, and processes in the computer. The control unit 41 is an arithmetic device that executes a program stored in the main storage unit 42, receives data from the input device or the storage device, calculates and processes the data, and outputs the data to the output device or the storage device.

  The main storage unit 42 is a ROM (Read Only Memory), a RAM (Random Access Memory), or the like, and stores or temporarily stores a program or data such as an OS (Operating System) or application software that is basic software executed by the control unit 41. It is a storage device to save.

  The auxiliary storage unit 43 is an HDD (Hard Disk Drive) or the like, and is a storage device that stores data related to application software or the like.

  The external storage device I / F unit 44 is an interface between the management terminal 10 and a recording medium 46 (eg, CD-ROM, DVD, flash memory, etc.) connected via a data transmission path such as USB (Universal Serial Bus). It is.

  The management terminal 10 stores a predetermined program in the recording medium 46. In addition, the program stored in the recording medium 46 is installed in the management terminal 10 via the external storage device I / F unit 44, and the installed predetermined program can be executed by the management terminal 10.

  The network I / F unit 45 is a first server 20 connected via a network such as a LAN (Local Area Network) or a WAN (Wide Area Network) constructed by a data transmission path such as a wired and / or wireless line. And an interface between the second server 30 and the management terminal 10.

  The hardware configuration of the first server 20 and the second server 30 is the same as that of the management terminal 10 shown in FIG.

<Conversion evaluation process>
FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the conversion evaluation process. As shown in FIG. 4, the management terminal 10 uses the layout conversion unit 11 to form the first data group into the data structure of the second data group based on the master layout information of the second server 30. Then, conversion is performed (S10).

  The management terminal 10 inputs the second data group converted in the process of S10 to the second server 30 and executes the update process (S11). When the management terminal 10 acquires the rule information from the storage unit 19 by the consistency determination unit 12, the management terminal 10 determines the consistency between the data items associated in the second data group based on the acquired rule information ( S12).

  The management terminal 10 determines whether or not an input value is input to a pre-selected data item for each file constituting the second data group for which the update processing has been executed by the second server 30 by the input value determination unit 13. (S13).

  The management terminal 10 uses the abnormal value determination unit 14 to add up the input values of the preset items for each file included in the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30, and to collect the data distribution It is determined whether there is an abnormal numerical value (S14).

  The management terminal 10 uses the sampling determination unit 15 to record the data items of the first data group held by the first server 20 as the sampling data and the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30. Data corresponding to multiple data items is extracted. The sampling judgment means 15 judges the consistency of the extracted data (S15).

  The management terminal 10 uses the data obtained by the output comparison means 16 by a predetermined process using the first data group by the first server 20 and the second data group by the second server 30. Data obtained by similar processing is compared (S16).

  The management terminal 10 evaluates the result determined in each process described above by the evaluation unit 17 (S17), and ends the process.

<Consistency judgment>
FIG. 5 is a diagram for explaining an outline of consistency determination. The consistency determination shown in FIG. 5 is executed by the consistency determination means 12. In the example of FIG. 5, the consistency between the data items associated in the second data group is determined with respect to the second data group for which the update process has been executed by the second server 30 after the conversion.

  FIG. 5A shows an example item of an unordered file in the second data group updated by the second system (for example, the production management system). Also, in the second data group, FIG. 5B shows an example item of the item master, FIG. 5C shows an example item of the supplier master, and FIG. The item example of the ward code master is shown.

  The consistency determination unit 12 configures the second data group in accordance with predefined rule information between files, for example, “the value of the item A of the file X is registered in the item B of the file Y”. Determine the consistency of data items associated with each other.

  For example, it is determined whether the value of “part number” in the remaining ordering file shown in FIG. 5A is registered in “part number” of the item master shown in FIG. Further, it is determined whether or not the value of “manufactured order” in the remaining ordering file shown in FIG. 5A is registered in the “vendor code” of the supplier master shown in FIG. Further, it is determined whether or not the value of “next ward” in the order remaining file shown in FIG. 5A is registered in the “ward code” of the in-house ward code master shown in FIG.

  Note that the above-described rule information can be described by a program as, for example, check logic, and a consistency check between data items associated between files can be automatically performed.

<Input value judgment>
FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining an outline of input value determination. The input value determination shown in FIG. 6 is executed by the input value determination means 13. In the example of FIG. 6, an item that must be input in advance is set for each file that constitutes the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30 after conversion. It is determined whether the input value of is input.

  The essential item may be an item necessary for specifying a process such as a predetermined process (for example, regular ordering process) or may be an item designated in advance by the user, but is not limited thereto. It is not a thing.

  In the example of the remaining order file shown in FIG. 6, “order number”, “factory”, “part number”, “manufacturing order destination”, “material unit area”, “number of orders”, “number of orders left”, “ It is determined whether input values of items such as “order part number”, “use category”, “order date”, “delivery date”, “material person in charge”, and the like have been input. It should be noted that the number and types of essential items are not limited to the above example.

<Abnormal value judgment>
FIG. 7 is a diagram for explaining an outline of the abnormal value determination. The abnormal value determination shown in FIG. 7 is executed by the abnormal value determination means 14. In the example of FIG. 7, main items are set for each file constituting the second data group that has been updated by the second server 30 after conversion, and the data distribution of the values of the items is determined. It is determined whether or not an abnormal value has been input by, for example, extracting outliers.

  For example, among the items in the remaining ordering file shown in FIG. 7A, the “order quantity” is a main item, and the values of the items are counted in increments of 500, for example, as shown in FIG. 7B. Create a scatter plot. In the diagram shown in FIG. 7B, the horizontal axis indicates the number of orders, and the vertical axis indicates the number of orders. In the example of FIG. 7B, for example, the values shown in the round frame 51 and the round frame 52 indicate that an abnormally large quantity has been ordered. In this way, it is determined whether there is any data that is determined to be an abnormal value in the main item.

<Sampling judgment>
FIG. 8 is a diagram for explaining an outline of sampling determination. The sampling judgment shown in FIG. 8 is executed by the sampling judgment means 15. When consistency is determined for the data items of the first data group held by the first server 20 and all the data items of the second data group updated by the second server 30 after conversion, the processing time Becomes enormous.

  Therefore, in the example of FIG. 8, it is evaluated whether or not the conversion is appropriately performed based on the sampling items extracted in advance. This shortens the evaluation processing time.

  As a sampling pattern, for example, a pattern extracted from a business viewpoint by a user may be set in advance, and a part where the process branches on a program logic for performing a predetermined process (for example, an if sentence or a while sentence) It may be set accordingly.

  For example, among the items of the production management master of the first server 20 shown in FIG. 8A, “Product number”, “Part number”, and “Fine classification” are part number reassignment logic shown in FIG. This corresponds to “part number” and “process order number” among the items of the item master of the second server 30 shown in FIG. Therefore, the values of the above-described items of the first server 20 shown in FIG. 8A are the values of the “part number” and “process order number” of the file items of the second server 30 shown in FIG. 8C. It is determined whether it is correctly associated with.

  As described above, the file items before and after the data transfer (conversion) do not correspond one-to-one, but for example, some patterns corresponding to a plurality of items are extracted, and sampling analysis is performed. As a result, it is possible to suppress the occurrence of omission even when the conversion conditions vary widely.

<Output judgment>
FIG. 9 is a diagram for explaining an outline of output determination. The output judgment shown in FIG. 9 is executed by the output comparison means 16. In the example of FIG. 9, it is determined whether or not the conversion is correctly performed by comparing the output results obtained from the same function (process) of each system before and after the conversion.

  For example, the case where the master data held by the first server 20 shown in FIG. 9A is converted into the master data held by the second server 30 shown in FIG. 9B will be described. In such a case, the content of the remaining ordering file obtained from the periodic ordering process shown in FIG. 9A is the same as the content of the remaining ordering file obtained from the periodic ordering process shown in FIG. It should be.

  Therefore, the output comparison means 16 is correctly converted when the same results are obtained after the same processing is executed by the systems shown in FIGS. 9A and 9B. Judge.

  In this way, in the output judgment, the input data (master) to be converted is not concerned, the same processing is performed in each system using the input data of each system, the results are compared, and the input data It becomes possible to evaluate the conversion result.

  As described above, it is possible to reduce the time for the update process after conversion by determining consistency and determining input values. In addition, it is possible to evaluate whether or not the conversion is correctly performed while reducing the evaluation process by the abnormal value determination, the sampling determination, the output determination, and the like.

  According to the embodiment described above, it is possible to evaluate the conversion result efficiently. Further, in the present embodiment, for example, it is possible to automate data verification performed by a person in charge by visual observation or the like by a program, thereby reducing the work load. This result is particularly effective when the amount of data is enormous. In the present embodiment, for example, the system is changed (updated), and is executed in a test before operation of the system after the change. However, the present embodiment is not limited to this.

  The present invention is not limited to the specifically disclosed embodiments, and various modifications and changes can be made without departing from the scope of the claims.

1 Conversion evaluation system (an example of information processing system)
10 Management terminal (example of information processing device)
11 layout conversion means 12 consistency judgment means 13 input value judgment means 14 abnormal value judgment means 15 sampling judgment means 16 output comparison means 17 evaluation means 18 notification means 19 storage means 19A layout information 19B rule information 20 first server 30 first 2 server 41 control unit 42 main storage unit 43 auxiliary storage unit 44 external storage device I / F unit 45 network I / F unit 46 recording medium

JP 05-324343 A

Claims (7)

An information processing system having an information processing apparatus that evaluates a result of converting a first data group into a second data group,
Consistency determination means for determining consistency between data items associated in the second data group after conversion based on a preset conversion condition;
An information processing system comprising: an evaluation unit that evaluates the content of the conversion based on a determination result obtained by the consistency determination unit.   The information processing system according to claim 1, further comprising an input value determination unit configured to determine whether an input value of a preselected data item is input to the second data group after conversion.   It has an abnormal value determination means for acquiring a data distribution for an input value of a preselected data item for the second data group after conversion and determining an abnormality of the input value from the acquired data distribution. The information processing system according to claim 1 or 2.   4. A sampling judgment unit for judging whether data items of the first data group correspond to a plurality of data items of the second data group after conversion. The information processing system according to one item.   Comparing means for comparing the data obtained by the predetermined process using the first data group with the data obtained by the predetermined process using the second data group after conversion. The information processing system according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the information processing system is characterized in that:   6. The information processing system according to claim 1, further comprising a notification unit that notifies a user of an evaluation result obtained by the evaluation unit. A conversion evaluation method in an information processing system having an information processing apparatus for evaluating a result of converting a first data group into a second data group,
A consistency determination procedure for determining consistency between data items associated in the second data group after conversion based on a preset conversion condition;
An evaluation procedure for evaluating the contents of the conversion based on a determination result obtained by the consistency determination procedure.

Images