Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
UltimateTech

Can I use MirrorSync with Externally Stored container fields?

9 posts in this topic

Hi There,

 

I have a database that my company uses for inspections. It is running very successfully, syncing data between iPads and the main database using MirrorSync. All of the initial difficulties we experienced have been fixed and for the most part, we have a very smooth solution.

 

The problem I have now is the database size. During an inspection, we need to take photos of non compliant items. As the sites are quite large, there could be up to 700 tenancies in any one site, and in each of those tenancies, there may be anything up to 7 non compliant items. As you can imagine this makes the database expand very very quickly, and it is currently sitting at 5.5Gb  :hmm:

 

What I want to be able to do is move all of the container fields to external storage. The only problem is, if I do this, I am not sure that MirrorSync will still sync all of the data. How would i best handle this situation to make sure I can still sync the required images and still manage to keep the size of the actual database file down?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of general options, without knowing your specific use case

 

1) Start filing closed jobs to an external storage, that way you can run your operational database as pr today

2) Use super container, not sure how this will sync

3) Use web viewer with some selv made system, I have between 500GB - 1TB of data in such a repository, will require access

4) Others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the server side, you can simply switch to externally stored containers, and everything will continue to work for all of your existing offline users - they won't be able to tell the difference, and MirrorSync doesn't care either way.

 

You may run into an issue when distributing new offline files, however. Let me ask a few questions:

1) Are your offline users running a copy of the server file, or have you created a separate mobile file for them to use?

2) If it's a copy of the server file, are you distributing an empty clone, or a full copy of the server file?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jesse,

 

I am distributing a full clone of the database to the offline users.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say a "full clone", can you clarify that? Do you mean a copy of the database will all records, or a copy of the database with no records?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jesse,

 

I mean a full clone of the database at that present time with all records, including photos that are in containers. This is why it is such a big issue. the database is far too large to be used effectively on a regular basis from the iPad running a remote database.

 

I need a way to store the photos externally on the server, but I also need the ability to sync the photos that are taken on the iPad on site as these make up part of the inspection. 

 

does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I understand now. I was confused because typically the word "clone" implies that it's empty (no records).

 

There is an extra step that needs to happen any time you're copying a FileMaker database with externally stored container fields to an iOS device. This is a FileMaker requirement, not a MirrorSync one. We've documented the process here: 

 

http://docs.360works.com/index.php/MirrorSync_advanced_topics#Does_MirrorSync_sync_external_container_fields.3F

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh lol, I wasn't aware that a clone was an empty database. Apologies for the confusion.

 

I will go through the info in the link you provided and test it out. See how I go :-)

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Jesse, Just going through that info, and I have a question. If the self contained file has all data available to it, does this mean that the file will have all of the container field files written into the actual self contained database?

 

If this file will have all of the data stored internally, would it not work out to be the same size on the iPad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By Gianluca D'Aquino
      Hello there,
      Is there a way to download the mirrorsync link directly on an iPad?
      In my final workflow I'll send the link with the newest version and users will open it directly from the ipad. Is there any integration with even other 3rd parties software to download the file on the ipad and then run it from Filemaker?
      Thanks. 
    • By Gianluca D'Aquino
      Hello there,
      I'm just investigating on 2 issue I have on sync 2 DB, 1 on the server and 1 on the iPad that are set to use a Spoke Db in the middle tier.
      Basically the sync is set to copy ALL the data from some tables on the server to the local db and send some data from the local db to the end server db. For some reason, on a large table, called Articles, with more than 130k records, the sync does not copy all the record for some users. There is no 'filter' based on user on the end db, and I run a pre-populate sync on the spoke db that copied all 130k records. When the sync is run for that specific user, the final result on the iPad is that the sync DELETES 12k records for no apparent reason.
       
      In addition, there is a Global table that has always 1 records and is get from the server to the client. But I found some times that there are several records on that table (more than 10) on the server, even if the sync is set to write on the spoke and not viceversa for that table. I have the suspect that are written from the sync. Is it possible?
      Thanks in advance,
      Gianluca  
    • By Scotty Nordlund
      After upgrading to MirrorSync 3 from 2, I can no longer sync container fields.  During the reconfiguration process, I get the tooltip in the uploaded image below.  The tooltip says "Neither field is writable.  This could be because they are calculation or summary fields. It could also be caused by field-level validation or custom access privileges.".  These container fields are not calc or summary fields.  There is no field level validation or custom access privileges that I know if.  They are full access, and the fields have not changed since my last MirrorSync 2 configuration.  Please help!

    • By turbopige
      Hi,
      I have MirrorSync(2.6) configuration with FileMaker Server to FileMaker Server Configuration.
      I Stop the synchronisation, I stop FileMaker server spoke , I transfer on the new one...  
      I have to change the ip configuration on the Spoke Server but MirrorSync ask me to install with a clean DataBase .... But it's impossible because we have a lot of Container Field ... and it will take to much time... 
      What can i do to not have this problem. 
       
      Thank you
      Marc
    • By sal88
      Hi all
      Fairly trivial (but annoying) problem here!
      I've just transferred all Invoice PDFs to their respective container fields - which is externally stored (non secure) on the FMS Server.
      However the first PDF in the table had an '_1' at the end of the filename on the server. When I cleared the field and re-added the PDF it then has '_2' at the end, and so on.
      The underscore disappeared when I transferred the container from 'Invoices/' to 'Invoices2/' but the problem remains when I transfer back to 'Invoices/'.
      It doesn't happen to any other PDFs/records, just this first one in the table. Any ideas how I can 'reset' this?
      MT