Server 5.x speed+stability (and really big files!)

[john white ifc]

I'm trying to determine whether, in the version move from server-v3 / pro-v4.x to server-v5 / pro-v5, FileMaker Inc delivered significant improvements in speed and stability. I'm interested in both personal experiences and "official" sources of information (which I can't seem to locate at filemaker.com.)

I have a client that I think should do the upgrade -- from server/client versions 3/4.1 to 5.5/5.5 -- but the only justification they'll really buy into is the speed-and-stability one.

I know that I can address issues such as: archiving old records, improving the hardware, re-writing client-side processes. But aside from all those things...

If nothing else changes, will a server/client upgrade from 3/4 to 5x/5x improve speed and stability?

_____________________________

Installation details:

• 12 files totaling 480 MB in size
• The two largest files are approx 110 and 280 MB
• All applications running on Windows NT

(I don't have more details about network equipment, processors or drives, but it's a respectable set up, run by an administrator who is competent -- except in FileMaker). _____________________________Client reports:

• Ridiculously long launch times on the server (3 hours -- sounds impossible, I know)
• Two server crashes in the past month
• Client-side operations -- esp. sorting and field-based value lists -- that are getting slow to the point of painful.

(I might be able to reduce the number of records being sorted, but speed of the value lists is a function of overall file size)

By the way, for those who use both, I posted this question at FileMaker Cafe as well.

[Kurt Knippel]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John White / IFC:

I'm trying to determine whether, in the version move from server-v3 / pro-v4.x to server-v5 / pro-v5, FileMaker Inc delivered significant improvements in speed and stability. I'm interested in both personal experiences and "official" sources of information (which I can't seem to locate at filemaker.com.)

If nothing else changes, will a server/client upgrade from 3/4 to 5x/5x improve speed and stability?

---

Honestly I cannot say that I have noticed any changes in speed or stability, although we made huge advances in our hardware performance at approximately the same time as our software upgrade, so I may be mistaking one for the other.

quote:

---

• Ridiculously long launch times on the server (3 hours -- sounds impossible, I know)
• Two server crashes in the past month
• Client-side operations -- esp. sorting and field-based value lists -- that are getting slow to the point of painful.

---

All of these sound like issues with either the server itself or the design of the databases, none of which are likly to be solved by this upgrade. I would first look to the server, wanna bet that they are running more than just Filemaker Server?

quote:

---

By the way, for those who use both, I posted this question at FileMaker Cafe as well.

---

Hey it cannot hurt, but they do not get anywhere near the traffic nor do they really have anyone of value posting there.

[JPaul]

In order to determine if a new software situation ( FM 5 Server & clients) really can improve the performance i suggest to follow these steps:

1 - Increase, if posible, the amount of cache on FM server

2 - Save the files as compressed copies

3 - Do, in all the scripts, an extensive use of "FLUSH CACHE" statement

This done, if there is not a significant change of performance i doubt that the hole is the software design !

I used FM 3 server with impressive amount of data without falling in the situation you' ve explained here.

Regards & nice job.

[DykstrL]

The first thing that comes to my mind is: how are the clients opening the files on the FM Server? Are they using the 'Hosts' button? or are they connecting via a mounted network volume - a definite no no!

Second, if FM Server is running on an NT Server that is also being used for a file server and print server, the file and print server operations get first priority for proccessing cycles (In fact, ANY Microsoft product running on any Windows Server O/S has priority for processing cycles) - FM Server gets what's left - and at a lower priority. FileMaker Server should be run on a dedicated box only with FM Server running.

Your number and size of files are no problem for any version of FMS. You Should see a 15-20% increase in speed on a comparable machine between FMS3 and FMS5. I don't think upgrading will solve your current problems. I think you have setup / network / user access / etc. problems that need to be resolved first.

We have 3 files on one of our FM Servers that are over 1GB (yes, that's GIGABITE) in size that take just a few seconds to open.

[Vaughan]

quote:

---

In fact, ANY Microsoft product running on any Windows Server O/S has priority for processing cycles

---

Is true? I mean actually documented?

[john white ifc]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dykstrl:

The first thing that comes to my mind is: how are the clients opening the files on the FM Server? Are they using the 'Hosts' button? or are they connecting via a mounted network volume - a definite no no!

---

In fact, that 3-hour time the client reports is what it takes for their server application to launch and make the files available for hosting. It's insane, I know. I did some work for them last winter and I remember the launch times being extraordinary, but this is many orders of magnitude beyond what anyone else has reported to this topic.

It occurs to me now -- considering that they've also reported multiple recent server crashes -- they they may have failed to follow their documented procedures for restoring backups after a crash, in which case FM Server's auto-recover procedures would have run, and the three hours seems remotely plausible.