Ivan Matiushkin
What a migration acceptance report looks like
Before commissioning a check, see the kind of evidence you can receive. This saved report was calculated by the existing migration engine from six synthetic records. It shows the failed result as well as the accepted result.
Independent working demonstration using synthetic data. Not a client deployment.
A first paid task can cover one export and one target specification: identify rejected or missing records, explain the differences and agree measurable acceptance checks. Price and timing are agreed after reviewing the scope.
Before correction · FAIL
| Records / Gross total · PLN | Source | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Records | 6 | 4 |
| Gross total · PLN | 1534.50 | 250.00 |
After correction and replay · PASS
| Records / Gross total · PLN | Source | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Records | 6 | 6 |
| Gross total · PLN | 1534.50 | 1534.50 |
Only the failed records were replayed
Selected: TX-104, TX-106
Unchanged: TX-101, TX-102, TX-103, TX-105
New writes: 2
Inspect or keep the evidence
Download HTML · JSON evidence · Synthetic source CSV
Sample generated:
delivery-sample/1
This is an example deliverable, not an assessment of your systems. The target is simulated. PASS covers the implemented checks; it does not establish ERP compatibility or performance at your volume.
Reproduce it: load the sample in Migration Showcase, validate, remove the SKU-X99 mapping, migrate and reconcile. Restore the mapping, replay failed records and reconcile again.
To scope your own check, describe the source and target, the fields that must match and what currently differs. Start with a sanitised sample; do not send credentials or production data through the contact form.