Does anyone know if any changes have been made to the storage of containers?

 

One question I have always had (and it was touched on but not fully explained on the FM 12 topics), if  Bill  enters an image on record one, and the image name from his camera is 123456.

 

Then Susan enters an image on record two created by her camera which was also called 123456.

 

Does FMS keep up with the links of the image to the specific record even though both images carry the same name?

 

It is time for us to move from v11 and I just do not have a clear understanding on how the remote containers work.

 

Michelle

There's a pretty good explanation of that (with regard to FileMaker Server 12) here. Quite a bit of the way down the page.

 

Under 12, it seems if you choose "open storage," the server will keep only one copy of an identical file, but if you choose "secure storage," multiple copies will be kept in a server-generated file directory structure.

 

Anyone have any idea if this has changed in 13 ??

Steven, my understanding of Michelle's question is that the file's themselves are different, but they share the same name.

 

Michelle, the short answer is: you don't have to worry about this scenario, FileMaker will keep track of which file is attached to which record.

 

IIRC, FileMaker will re-name subsequent files if a file with that name already exists in a folder. You could prevent this from happening by including the primary key of your record (and field name, in the case of multiple remote container fields) in the path to the file, which would mean each record in your databases uses a different folder to store files in (only applies to open storage).

One of the coolest new features is that you can now specify a separate "container data path" so that the external container data can now reside on a different folder and drive than the FM file itself

dansmith65 you are correct with your understanding of my question.

Thank you for clearing that up for me, I was worried that something would eventually break if that scenario happened in real-life.

 

I hate to ask: can you tell me how to attach a PK to a container item. I see this posted in several places but nobody describes how to to do it.

 

 

Question to Wim:

Your response above about the different drive, is that on a non-hosted db or will the different drive now work on the server as well. As I remember (I think) from FMS 12 the container storage could not be on a different drive.

I attached a screenshot. id is a field defined to auto-enter either a serial number or a uuid.

 

Question to Wim:

Your response above about the different drive, is that on a non-hosted db or will the different drive now work on the server as well. As I remember (I think) from FMS 12 the container storage could not be on a different drive.

 

I was talking only about server, where there are a few new settings, including setting the path to the remote container data:

Wim is right, the new option for storing container data on a different drive is really one of the coolest new features of the server.

Now you can have your DB files on a fast SSD and store container data on a large separate drive.

How bad news is this for the folks at 360W (Super Container)?

How bad news is this for the folks at 360W (Super Container)?

 

Still very different beasts.  FMI very explicitly tells us not to touch the externally stored files.  Which is not so much of a problem with SC.

 

SC is more of a document management system, whereas the FM feature is more geared towards improving database speed and backup speed, not an attempt to be a document management system that allows the files to be manipulated outside if the database.