I would love for people to write in with their experiences using Webdirect, concurrent users, server(s), and results. Hopefully this thread gains some ground.
We are using Mac Pro servers, but...
We have been looking for the same, and may have to dive into an expensive 12-core second server just in case FileMaker Inc's listed requirements are really needed for average use. At any given average minute most of our 40 peak IWP simultaneous connections are idle, so we're looking for 40 sumultaneous Webdirect answers knowing that there is a persistent pushed updates from the server. We are using a single Mac Pro to test WD, and based on this coming month's real-world usage (or anyone else who writes in) we may be buying a second Mac Pro, 12-core.
We did manage to hammer away at an about-to-be-deployed solution using an "unfair" busy robot (scripted searches, sorts, layout movement, PDF reporting on server robot, etc.) using 6 concurrent connections to our single FileMaker Server install, Mac Pro 4-core. Pretty smooth with no bad delays, and the PDF robot on the server was constantly churning as the 6 users continued to work. Note that we were using Chrome on Windows and Safari on Mac, and avoided the totally unusable Internet Explorer. All of our web users will be required to use Chrome untill WD or browsers get an update.
In a month we should have 20 users hitting the new solution, split between WD and FMP. We may be able get up to 20 WD users on our tests and it will become obvious if we would need a second machine (8-core according to FMI.)
I have a customer with a big FileMaker solution which includes a WebDirect layout. They have around 12-15 user connected all day via WebDirect and the system works fine. No problems at all.
The setup is a 16 GB RAM Mac Mini Server, MacOSX 10.9.4.
The only difference is they have a very fast internet connection.
Of course is not as fast as a wikipedia page but it does the job very decently.
When you have a moment: What browsers are they using, is it only one simple WebDirect layout, and how fast is the internet connection? Thanks.
Jrenfrew, also keep in mind that there will need to be some webdirect optimization for the solution. If the client is new to FMP my guess is that there will need to be some work in this area. Search Technet for discussions on this topic.
A lot of it is really common sense stuff:
-Having a faster server = better performance. More RAM/processor = faster speed.
-Solutions optimized for WAN performance will perform better.
-A LAN server will work faster for local users.
-You will be limited by the slower of the two internet connection speeds (server upload / client download)
The Richard Carlton video on webdirect is a good starting point towards optimizing, but you might already be past that.
Not stuff I can already read from the literature but observed, tested and anecdotal
think that fits in to that category
thanks Scott... just the discussion I would like a bit of public visibility for..
what size of file, how many users, what memory and processor... etc etc
if everyone says the FM specs are abotu right that will be a good thing, if people say its woefully underpowered then so be it.
None of us have time to test lots of confighurations but a bit of crowd sourced data will really help here
yes... aware of that, and general good practice like avoiding unstored calcs if poss... but some crowdsourced performance data will still be helpful