Which action should be taken when critical outcomes are not handled by migration tools?

Question

Options

• ASkip the migration of those items
• BDevelop custom scripts to address the gaps
• CRevert to manual migration for all items
• DUse Adobe Analytics to analyze migration gaps

• A
  4% (1)
• B
  81% (22)
• C
  11% (3)
• D
  4% (1)

Explanation

When migration tools fall short of handling critical outcomes, developing custom scripts bridges the gap - this is the standard professional practice because it allows precise, targeted handling of edge cases without abandoning the broader automated migration effort. Custom scripts can be tailored to the specific data structures, business rules, or dependencies that generic tools cannot anticipate.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Skip) - Skipping critical outcomes is never acceptable; "critical" by definition means the business cannot afford to lose or ignore those items.
• C (Revert to manual for all items) - This throws away the efficiency gains of automation entirely; only the gaps need special handling, not everything.
• D (Adobe Analytics) - Adobe Analytics is a web analytics product, not a migration gap resolution tool; it has no role in fixing migration shortfalls.

Memory tip: Think of custom scripts as a "patch kit" - when your automated migration tool is like a moving truck that can't fit a few oddly-shaped items, you don't abandon the truck or leave the items behind; you find a custom solution just for those pieces.

No community discussion yet for this question.