I have a big database running smoothly internally (FM Server 16 with 15 users). Some clients have expressed the desire to see their files. I recently hosted the whole file on the cloud but it was too slow for my users so I drop the idea to host everything. Now, I am trying to find another solution. My idea is to design a second database which will be hosted as WebDirect. I would use the External Data Source to link the two DBs. Would you recreate on DB2 the needed layouts and display data through relationships or import records by scripts from DB1 to DB2 or lookup records or do something else?
Importing records causes an entire new level of complexity for you to support as you would be required to keep the records synced in two places. So you would need to also add:
-A mechanism to update that data on a schedule
-"Collision detection" for how to pull record updates. EG what if a record changes in DB2 and DB1 before an import runs?
Since filemaker supports linking multiple files together (before FM7, every table was a separate file), it just makes sense to establish the external reference to the file.
Now for performance, are you planning on hosting DB2 on a different server than DB1? Because in that case, performance can suffer as you still have to open DB1 across a network to pull the data. So I doubt it would be much faster than just opening up DB1 across a network.
You can host WebDirect off DB1 without creating a new database for it. You can easily detect and redirect users to different layouts with a simple script like:
Running that as part of your OnFirstWindowOpen trigger action can allow you to have multiple "interfaces" in the same filemaker file, making data and layouts easier to manage.
How much performance optimization did you try to do when you hosted the file in the cloud? It sounds like you killed the idea pretty quickly. It takes a lot to get good WAN performance, especially to users that are used to the much faster LAN Server experience. However, it is possible to do a lot of performance increases. Hosting on WAN exposes all sorts of performance flaws that you may not consider.