henrywid Posted August 3, 2001 Share Posted August 3, 2001 Quick question. I am running a filemaker server which is remotely accessed by several other terminals. My question is, when a terminal access the server, is the application processed in the server first before being fed into the terminals or are the terminals the ones who process the data? The reason why I am asking this is because the terminal seems to be really slow in computing out the information. So I am trying to identify whether it's the server issue or just the terminal being slow? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eremaut Posted August 3, 2001 Share Posted August 3, 2001 Hi, Quick answer. Basicly the application, we better say the scripts, are always running on the client computer. A few tasks are performed by the server itself, like keeping the files open and providing the async. file I/O, maintaining the indexing (host based), etc ... When you say "remotely accessed by terminals", do you mean that computers are connected to the server via PSTN or ISDN lines? If yes, then we found your performance bottleneck! Please confirm or check this out ... Have fun, Erwin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveOak Posted August 3, 2001 Share Posted August 3, 2001 If the slowdown you are looking for happen when the FM files were moved from a single machine environment to a server environment, it is most likely not the server OR the client, but the network communication. FM is a disk based program. When on a local machine, disk access moves at the speed of the disk interface. In a server environment, the "disk access" speed is that of the network (10 Based T, 100 Based T, or whatever). The speed decline between a disk access on a local machine and a data access over the network is can be between a 10:1 and 100:1 reduction. Scripts that run in 1-2 seconds on a local machine can easily take 1 minute over a network. -bd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted August 3, 2001 Share Posted August 3, 2001 Let me add that on Windows network the speed is basically the same from server or from local processing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Knippel Posted August 3, 2001 Share Posted August 3, 2001 quote: Originally posted by Anatoli: Let me add that on Windows network the speed is basically the same from server or from local processing. I'll disagree with you here. It cannot possibly be so. Local processing is travelling on paths (system bus, RAM, hardisk, etc) that are 100s to 1000s of times faster than network speeds, that this is simply not possible. Now it is, entirely possible that in your specific configuration you did not notice and differences. Networking, Ethernet and TCP/IP are not any faster on Windows or Macintosh or Unix systems. But like I said your SPECIFIC case may have been such that you did not NOTICE and differences, but they are there. Aside from any hardware based speed issues (disk access, network topology, error rates, ect) there are as many speed advatages on each OS as there are disadvantages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted August 4, 2001 Share Posted August 4, 2001 Mac has the slowest TCP/IP I ever experienced. The 10Mb is slow, on 100Mb it works like 10Mb on PC. Add the nonexistent multitasking on Mac server and you will get your result. The NT FileMaker server is around 3 times faster than Mac according to all users. And I think you are not counting the spread of load between 2 machines. Server is handling the disk I/O and the client is just spitting received data to the screen. On good NT PCs yes. Actually this sounds silly, but my web companion served pages are faster over 155Mb web, than on local machine. First I thought it is coming from local cache, but not, even custom searches where executed at unbelievable speed. Again, the server is so fast in data delivery and client just displays data. And local machine alone is struggling to do lot of things in the same moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmirandav Posted August 21, 2001 Share Posted August 21, 2001 I beleive the processing occurs in the client's computer leaving to the server the task of indexing and the managment of the various simultaneus users. As to the speed, add RAM, faster SCSI disk a faster ethernet, or, if your are using the server in one location an the clients in other cities, etc. try Windows Terminal Services, I have been advised that these services speed up the operations quite a lot when using slow connections. Please correct me if I'm wrong in this. Also let me express my disapponintment in the fact ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arin Posted September 10, 2001 Share Posted September 10, 2001 quote: The NT FileMaker server is around 3 times faster than Mac according to all users. Again Anatoli I must ask you to specify Mac OS 7.x - 9.2, or Mac OS X, as these are very VERY different beasts... Mac OS X brings a new era of unix based computing to the Mac platform (and PPC G4), and performance at all levels (including TCP/IP) will be changing drastically. -A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted September 11, 2001 Share Posted September 11, 2001 I definitely share that idea, which is why I wrote some time ago: Maybe it will be better on MacX as well. MacX will have all that good memory management Windows users have for years. Look I do not want to start war; I am here to share experiences and knowledge. Anatoli, loyal Apple user since 1982. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arin Posted September 12, 2001 Share Posted September 12, 2001 That's cool, me either, I just want to make sure that the version of the MacOS is specified. I've been a mac user since the 512, but in all honesty the "Classic MacOS" (1 - 9.2) is basically an elegant toy when compared to Mac OS X. In my mind it's very similar to the diff between Win98, and Win NT. (or ME and 2000) anyway this isn't really the place to post this sort of thing, I just wanted to let you know, Anatoli, no stress here, I'm not looking for a Mac vs. PC shootout, I'm just looking for more of a distinction between what was (Classic MacOS) and what is (MacOS X) in terms of Mac based OSes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 I wish the Apple Company just all the best. You are right with the Windows stuff, not the same league. My personal preferences at the moment are NT, MacOS and W2K then nothing, then pile of sh** and then gizmos like 95 and 98. BTW, http://www.24u.cz (nice local guys) are doing fat-fat plug ins; MacOS, MacX and Windows in one plug in! Amazing stuff :-) Anatoli Apple user since IIe -- beat that if you can [ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: Anatoli ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arin Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 I started playing with an Apple at my friend's house growing up, he had an Apple II+ My first mahcine was an Apple IIc (the "portable" IIe) with a monochrome monitor. Anyway thanks for the link those guys have some WAY COOL stuff!! That "Transcoding" plug-in looks awesome! -a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 Great stuff the series II! It was running AppleDOS, Pascal (UCDS I think) and CP/M on Microsoft HW card with Z80 processor. Apple was 1 billion Company and Microsoft small third party supplier. Yeah, those young wizards look very promising (24U)! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
This topic is 8281 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