AnsweredAssumed Answered

Sync solution using Base64Encode container files vs standard Set Field (Container) - Your thoughts...

Question asked by BenGraham on Jun 22, 2017
Latest reply on Jun 23, 2017 by user19752

I have an existing sync solution to sync from FileMaker Go pushing and pulling data from FileMaker Pro.   The existing scripts set container fields for pictures or files as well and sync the other data fields.  The existing system is transactional keeping a parent record and its children as one single document that either is pushed or pulled in it entirety or not at all.


I was considering an updated or new build for this that would use Base64Encode and Base64Decode so the special routines I have used for dealing with the container fields could be eliminated by using Base64 Encoding the images or files from the container fields would be converted to text before sending.  This would be a single text document package per record including the parent with children to push up to or pull down from the hosted filemaker server files.


I am looking for feedback on if this is a good idea or not.  Suggestions...


Some concerns that come to mind:


1. the character limit at least when Pulling records down if using PSoS ( Perform Script on Server) script step. - this can be tested for in the scripts, but I see how a single picture can already have millions of characters.


2. Speed - will using Base64Encoding be such a speed killer that it is not worth it?


3. What else may be an issue.