HazMatt Posted November 18, 2002 Posted November 18, 2002 Here is my setup, all on a 10 Base-T ethernet network. We are hosting 30 databases on a Windows NT server using FileMaker Server 5, using TCP / IP. iMac 700 MHz iMac 233 MHz iMac 233 MHz Power Mac G3 B&W 400 MHz Power Mac G3 266 MHz Power Mac G3 266 MHz Power Mac 8500 120 MHz Power Mac 7200 75 MHz Power Mac 7100 80 MHz ---- 6 or 7 PCs with a similar performance range. I've been trying to get the client machines up to FileMaker 6, and am having problems with the Power Mac 7100 / 80. It has 136 MB of Ram, Mac OS 8.6, and FileMaker 6.0v3. I can open the databases, but inevitably I will run into a communication error and all my databases will close. Performance is slow when it works, but it SHOULD just work. Is my network simply getting bogged down? This particular machine has an old style ethernet connection, and I have a converter for that, maybe that's a bottle-neck? Any ideas?
jasonwood Posted November 18, 2002 Posted November 18, 2002 The first thing I always think of is SLEEP. Is the computer set to go to sleep at all? Check Energy saver control panel. Not sure if you can connect using AppleTalk if the server is a PC but you should make sure your client is set up to connect via TCP/IP. It is much more reliable in my experience.
IdealData Posted November 19, 2002 Posted November 19, 2002 Is the NT Server dedicated to FM Server ?? You could use the iMac-700 as it's the fastest you've got nad it already has 100Base networking. Get yourself into 100Base-T allround. 100Base switch would help. I'm surprised you get this problem in any form of LAN. I run a two site WAN with a 128k link with e-mail and other stuff sharing the same band-width. The same problem occurs, but it's not bad.
HazMatt Posted November 19, 2002 Author Posted November 19, 2002 The NT server hosts a shared network volume and gets sproradic use. Sometimes I as a graphic designer need to swap large files and there's another guy with heavy usage. But
Kurt Knippel Posted November 19, 2002 Posted November 19, 2002 You should look into both upgrading to 100 base-T ethernet cards, and add 10/100 Switches. This is an excellent way to boost you network performance by quite a big factor.
Bob White Posted November 22, 2002 Posted November 22, 2002 It's could be the ethernet card. Back when we still had 7100's, we ended up putting third party ethernet cards (mostly Asante) in them after driving the support guys and network guru's a little crazy. The card that came from the factory in the 7100's and early 7200's apparently is kinda flaky.
HazMatt Posted November 22, 2002 Author Posted November 22, 2002 Thanks for all the advice on networks. For now, I tried going back to OS 8.5 (It was having the problems at 8.6). And
BobWeaver Posted November 22, 2002 Posted November 22, 2002 I'm surprised that 8.5 works better than 8.6. OS8.6 was just about the most reliable version that Apple ever released. Filemaker can generate a lot of network traffic depending how it's been setup. Have you noticed if any of the other machines experience problems when you bring the 7100 on line? Do you see the collision/jam LEDs on the hub light up a lot? My guess is that you are getting a lot of collisions. I suspect that the cheapest fix is to replace the hub with a switch. These are not very expensive. You could even use a small 5 port switch ($50) just to break up the network a bit. Put the server and the 7100 on the switch. Then run an uplink cable from the switch to the hub to tie in the rest of the network. You can always upgrade the individual ethernet cards on the machines later if you need to.
Kurt Knippel Posted November 22, 2002 Posted November 22, 2002 If you are gonna go with a switch, might as well get everyone on the switch. This will help with Filemaker chatter, since every computer will only be talking with the server (thanks to the switch) rather than broadcasting all over the network with the hub.
BobWeaver Posted November 23, 2002 Posted November 23, 2002 I agree. I haven't checked out switch prices for a few months. Last time I checked, there was a bit of a price jump going from a 5 port (which is the smallest, I think) to something that would handle the 17 computers on this network. Another possibility, if you have the network on two or three hubs instead of one, is to put the server on the switch and then connect each hub to a port on the switch.
Recommended Posts
This topic is 8047 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now