Fabrication • materials • shop managementJoin the mailing list
Countertop Forum
Reading rooms & reference links
Information about this site
Implementation / Practical guide

Moving countertop shop data: an acceptance plan before the cutover

Approve a migration by reconciling records, relationships and usable files. Preserve the source export, test a representative subset, and define rollback responsibility before moving live work.

Editorial Desk
Quick answer

Approve a migration by reconciling records, relationships and usable files. Preserve the source export, test a representative subset, and define rollback responsibility before moving live work.

Inventory what must survive

List the data the shop relies on: customers, active jobs, quotes, approved drawings, attachments, schedules, inventory allocations and historical financial references. For each category, identify the system of record and the person able to judge whether the migrated result is usable. Export availability does not establish that every relationship will survive an import.

Separate active work from reference history. The shop may need different access and validation for jobs currently in production than for a completed project from years earlier. Record retention and access requirements with the people responsible for the relevant business records; do not discard the source merely because an import completed.

Map fields and relationships

Document how source fields map into the destination and how identifiers are preserved. Address duplicate customers, renamed materials and obsolete statuses before importing. Record decisions rather than leaving them inside a one-off script no one understands.

Relationships deserve their own test. A drawing must belong to the correct job and revision. A slab reservation must refer to the correct material and project. A successful row count cannot establish those connections. Choose samples that exercise partial jobs, changes and attachments as well as ordinary records.

Run a pilot import

CheckAcceptance evidence
Record totalsSource and destination counts with explained exclusions
Important valuesReconciled sample of prices, dates and statuses
RelationshipsCorrect customer, job, part and material associations
AttachmentsFiles open and match the intended revision
PermissionsEach role sees and changes only the intended records

Use a controlled destination and prevent test records from sending customer messages or affecting production. Ask the supplier to identify what is standard migration work and what requires custom handling. Keep failed examples so the next trial tests the same issues rather than starting from a more convenient sample.

Plan the final change window

Define when changes stop in the source and how work arriving during the transition is captured. Identify who reconciles those changes and who authorizes live use. The cutover plan needs named responsibilities for the office, production and field teams, not just an import completion message.

Set explicit rollback conditions. If critical attachments cannot be opened or reservations are unreliable, specify which system remains authoritative and how newly entered work will be preserved. Rehearse the decision on a practice import so the team is not inventing a response during an active production day.

Keep a migration record

Retain the original exports, mapping decisions, reconciliation results and final acceptance. Protect them using the shop’s normal access controls. Do not place real customer exports into a public issue tracker or a demonstration dataset.

The products in the register are candidates for these acceptance questions, not products whose migrations we have independently tested. A supplier’s claim that migration is included should become a written statement of the objects, formats and validation work included in your proposal. That makes completion something the shop can verify.

Sources and product records

Working references

Browse the product comparison register · How we evaluate evidence · Interview and demonstration worksheets

Software options to evaluate

Use the same practice job and acceptance criteria for each proposed configuration. These brief descriptions reflect vendor documentation, not independent test results.

Confirm current modules, versions, data exports and implementation scope directly. Open the software comparison register.

Product records for this article

  • CounterGo — sources, check date and demonstration questions
  • Systemize — sources, check date and demonstration questions
  • ActionFlow — sources, check date and demonstration questions
  • StoneAPP — sources, check date and demonstration questions
  • SlabOS — sources, check date and demonstration questions
  • SlabWise — sources, check date and demonstration questions
Compare products
About this article

Original editorial evaluation framework. Product-specific descriptions are attributed to vendor documentation; no independent test, interview or survey result is claimed. Examples and proposed exercises are illustrative.

Editorial approach & corrections →
This publication uses AI-assisted research and drafting.
The Countertop Forum mailing list

Keep up with the shop.

Practical articles on software, equipment, and running a fabrication business.

A new mailing list from this publication’s publisher. No messages have been scheduled yet. Unsubscribe at any time. How we use your information.