AnsweredAssumed Answered

Image based database is very slow

Question asked by BenHough on Aug 13, 2015
Latest reply on Aug 14, 2015 by philmodjunk


Image based database is very slow


Hi all

I have developed a solution for the Art business I work for. We have maybe 100 records of artworks. Each record has 5 container fields into which a set of buttons can load and delete images and pdf documents relating to the artworks.

I have written into the script of these buttons that filemaker should store a reference to these images and pdf, since the images are often quite high resolution jpgs and I did not want to increase the size of the database file to unreasonable proportions. I was also told that it was best practise to reference files rather than store them in Filemaker.

However, having loaded all the images into the records, the performance of filemaker is slow beyond belief.

It is certainly worsened by the fact that the setup in my office is as such: my computer hosts the filemaker file while the images are on a NAS drive in our local network.

I can see that it may be better to store all images relating to the database on the host computer, but would it be even better to store them all in the DB file?

I am getting mixed messages from my online searches in this matter. Filemaker themselves write the following:

Calculation fields should be stored whenever possible.  Unstored calculations calculate "on the fly" when needed, which is much slower.  Avoiding finds on unstored calculation fields or doing record level access calculations on large files, can prevent slowness in databases.



Many thanks in advance for any advice and views