Downgrade MacOS server for FMP server v3?

[red menace]

I know it's usually bad form to dive into a new board with a question, but what I've already found here enabled me to ask a better one than I might have otherwise. So here goes...

We've got over 20 Mac clients (mostly 6100s... think "dumpster fodder") running FMP 4.1v1 to connect to a server running the same. Thanks to detailed contributions to this forum (as well as an effective search function), I've learned that this is, ahem, not ideal.

It sounds like the ideal config would be a B&W G3 running FMP server v3. We already have both of these assets in-house, so no problem there. The question is whether it makes sense to go to the trouble to replace the existing FMP server: a G4/733 running 9.2.

The G4 won't run 8.6, so I can't pare down its OS to the ideal. But swapping to the G3 is disruptive, and the processor is stock -- which means a drop in clock speed unless the CPU is upgraded. (IIRC, G3 upgrades only go to 800 or 900.)

Is it worth swapping the server with an upgraded G3 just to run 8.6? Are there other issues with running 1995-vintage software on 9.2 that would make 8.6 preferable?

And then there's the issue of the client machines -- is it worth going all-out on a G3 with 8.6 when the clients might represent a bottleneck of their own?

Thank you all for the useful knowledge in the archives, and thanks in advance for any advice!

--Chris

[Vaughan]

I doubt there'll be any noticeable difference between a B&W G3 and a G4 for the end user. Most performance is limited by hard disk speed and network throughput, and the two machines will probably be about the same.

However there will be a difference in performance between FMS and FMP on the host machine. Use whatever machine you need to run FMS 3.0.

[red menace]

That's the other question: is there any performance advantage to be gained on one machine or the other when it comes to FMS3?

With regard to network throughput, is the 10T enet or the 60MHz client more of a bottleneck? (Just wondering if it's worth upgrading the client machines to PM8600s, for example.)

[Tripod]

Just depends on what you are doing and how many are logged in. I would say that if you could upgrade the clients to 8600/200 that would be a real boost as the 604e had it all over the 601, in addition to the clockspeed (it's a significantly faster chip at the same clock speed as it does more per cycle.)

So, screen redraws, scrolling, etc... are going to be faster with faster clients. This also depends on the complexity of your layouts (not just fields, but graphics elements) and this is going to affect both the network throughput and the apparent 'speed' (or lack thereof) of the ancient power mac hardware. The network is going to me more of a bottlenect the more users are logged in simulaneously.

Probably not much help, but I think it really does depend your your layouts, number of relationships, number of simultaneous network users, etc...

[stanley]

You don't have to go too crazy with the Server hardware, at least as far as the CPU is concerned - I've got two clients whose very graphic-intensive db systems are hosted on Beige G3/233 boxes. The key, as Vaughan pointed out, is disk speed. Get the fastest drive subsystem you can and slap it onto that B/W G3 you've got, and you'll be fine. As to the client machines, faster is better, yes. However, if you're running it all on 10T, you're probably going to run into bottlenecks. Get new routers (if you need to) and new network cards (ditto, and they're cheap), or get the better machines for the clients.

Of course, it all depends on how much data is being pushed through the pipe, but a wider pipe is always better.

-Stanley

[Steve T.]

Hmm... I was not aware of any speed issues with FMP4 and OS 9.2. Oh, well.. can't keep up w/everything I suppose, but I wouldn't downgrade servers without verifying it "live" with your particular system. As for the client applications, FileMaker 4-6 is very humble, but I'd suggest going up to G3 if you're gonna buy hardware so that you'll have the flexibility to upgrade to FMP7 (minimum G3, 128MB RAM). If you're gonna stick w/4 for sure, then I agree w/Tripod's recommendation of a 604e if you wanna save a few bucks... but check G3 prices first.

--ST

[red menace]

...and over 9-year-old software, to boot. After some initial hassle undoing ancient defaults, FMS3 is up on the G4. We were previously seeing "too many users/insufficient resources" messages around 19-21 users -- but now, there are 35 users and no indications of trouble. (Hope this doesn't jinx it.)

Why excitement? Well, first off because it wound up ultimately being rather easy. This is significant because while I am pretty good at Mac "tech support" work, I am neither a FM nor even a DB person.; and the databases are critical to 95% of the staff, so the consequences of screwing it up are dire. Second because of the statistics being kept on resources such as network, disk, and cache. This provides a concrete barometer of the next weakness(es) in the chain.

The G4 with 9.2 (not even the patched 9.2.1 or 9.2.2) is humming along just fine, but it might get replaced with a G3/350 and 8.6 depending on workstation needs. The temptation to upgrade client machines will be determined by the price points of various used hardware, but for now this represents a worthwhile leap.

Once again, thanks everybody!