NO IMPROVEMENT WITH SSD vs HDD

[carlosnorvik]

Hi:

I have heard that a SSD improves server performance for Remote Access.

Not in my tests, speeds are nearly identical, Access through Internet done using my alternate internet provider service.

Clone copies of everything, only 1 server connected at a time to router for testing.

Software: Server 11 Win + FMPro10 Mac

Server 1: Intel Core i3 M350 @ 2.27Ghz - 2.27 Ghz

4 GB RAM (2.86 usable)

32 bit Win 7 Ultimate (fresh install)

Crucial SSD

Server 2: Intel Core i3 M350 @ 2.27Ghz - 2.27 Ghz

3 GB RAM (2.74 usable)

32 bit Win 7 Professional (factory install)

5400 RMP normal HDD

Sort all records in order control database

HDD 13 sec, SSD 12 sec; local to HDD server 2 seconds

Multy currency Balance in chekbook application with 7 accounts (separate balance in currency and USD for all the accounts, MANY summaries involved, 3267 records)

HDD 9 min 06 sec, SSD 9 min 18 sec.; local to HDD server 7 seconds

SSD is really fast for many tasks like booting, and isntalling programs (less that 50 seconds for Open Office 3.4 installation) but no improvement for FM server.

FM Server performance for WAN access is really dissapointing. It is great for LAN access.

Regards

Carlos

[carlosnorvik]

So far the best way I have found to keep a decent speed when connected remotely is to use Logmein, and use the Filemaker copy on my desktop

[IdealData]

I have heard that a SSD improves server performance for Remote Access

Not quite sure where you heard that, but SSD is unlikely to improve remote access, at least to any appreciable level.

SSD units come in differing performance standards so you should be aware of the differences in a SSD v HDD drive test. A low end SSD might have poorer performance characteristics than a higher end HDD, but in general SSD are faster at reading, but not necessarily at writing.

LogMeIn (and other remote desktop methods) are still best performance over WAN connections.

Your tests are also unfair as the machine setups were not identical.

[Vaughan]

If you're accessing over WAN then it's possible you're limited to a 2 to 8 megabits per second bandwidth -- which is reasonably good 3G wireless broadband speeds. This would be throttling data throughput so much that the different in disk speeds is being masked.

[Steven H. Blackwell]

In addition to some of the other comments here, you're not using certified OS in one instance, and a workstation OS in the other. Try putting these on Server class OS. Additionally, you might want to take a look at some of the information in a post on the FileMaker Security BLOG:

http://fmforums.com/forum/blog/13/entry-201-gas-liquid-or-solid-drive-on/

Steven

[carlosnorvik]

Hi everybody

Replying to some of the questions above:

A) OS and machine

I used to host it on a MacMini server which decided to fry itself (thanks 360 remote backup, you saved my data), my current setup was an emergency purchase just to keep the business running, but since performance did not improve or deteriorate (WAN and LAN) , I kept it. We seldom have more than 4 users connected at the same time, maybe that is why there was no change in performance.

Internet speed,, Unfortunately slow, 7 down, 1.5 up, but nothing better is available where we are located.

C ) Where I read about SSD improving performance, Google it and you will find plenty of sources.

D) Fairness, sure many things in life are unfair, like not having twin machines to do the test, but the configuration is pretty similar.

Since one HDD crashed, I bought an SSD to replace it and tested just to satisfy my curiosity, if performance had improved, I would be a happier man, since it did not improve I am also happier because I don't have the doubt in my mind anymore.

E) LogmeIn, is my remote access favorite for FileMaker when not at the office.

FM WAN speed seems to be the sour spot of a great product.

Have a great weekend.

Carlos

[Wim Decorte]

C ) Where I read about SSD improving performance, Google it and you will find plenty of sources.

I think you were misinterpreting the search results. SDD will dramatically increase performance for all i/o operations. Like backups, or flushing the cache. it will do nothing at all for remote access.

There are 4 typical bottlenecks:

1) disk i/o

2) processor

3) memory

4) network

WAN access suffers most in #4, it is unlikely you can solve direct WAN access in such a way that disk i/o would become your primary bottleneck.

[carlosnorvik]

Hi Wim

Fully agree that the problem is mainly #4

Here I found an interesting way to do it, maybe in the future, right now I only have 2 remote users who mainly enter data in simple forms, where WAN remote access is sort of adequate.

http://www.sohnar.com/Manuals/HostingTrafficandTechnicalSpecification.pdf

[Wim Decorte]

Hmmm not sure what you are reading into that as a solution for your own remote access. Traffic seems to just a vertical market FM solution targeted to the creative business, and they describe that you can use Terminal Services for best WAN perfomrance. Which you can do with any FM solution.

There is a glaring mistake in their description of hardware though. FMS can take advantage of multiple processors, contrary to what they state.