5 Replies Latest reply on Jul 18, 2015 4:15 PM by bigtom

    Does a FM Server performan faster than a client hosted FM database?

      Hi,

       

      I am a developer of an inhouse-CRM-solution that still is under some development. I want up to 4-5 users to test it without uploading it to the FM Server (because of data-integrity, not having scripts to synchronize the server with the test database etc.).

       

      Now it seems that the access to the database on the developer Mac (FM 14 Advanced Pro) is very slow. Even it nothing is running on the Mac and I do not touch any keys at all - even if only one user tries to access it, the user gets quite big time lacks. If I do upload the same database to the server everything works (thanks god) fast.

       

      My question - is it a feasible workaround to install the FM Server on the developer Mac, upload the database to that server and do the serving to the users also as developing (in the night times) on one machine till the database can get released?

       

      Any experience or suggestions would be nice.

       

      Best,

      Luna

        • 1. Re: Does a FM Server performan faster than a client hosted FM database?
          wimdecorte

          Are you using FMP as the host and other users do "open remote"?

          (Hoping that you don't use OS file sharing to let multiple users access the file).

           

          FMS is a faster host than FMP is, but you should not assume that any performance problems you are seeing now will go away.  The only sure way to test is to host it on FMS and then test.  Could be some design flaws that are slowing things down.

           

          I don't think it is a good idea to install FMS on the developer Mac.  It can be done and it will work but you really need to get a separate development/testing server.  If for nothing else to be able to take advantage of the backups that FMS can take of your dev files.

          • 2. Re: Does a FM Server performan faster than a client hosted FM database?

            Yeas, I use FMP as the host. As the database works fast on the server ( I tested that) and slow on FMP as the host, what kind of design flaws do you have in mind?

             

            My prob is that the "still under development" database also is a single-user-production-database. If I upload that onto the server and make it avaliabel to the other users I would have to synchronize it back regularily into the develoment database - and this seems not to be so easy (or too complicated for at least me).

             

            I know you can argue that tis shouldnot be the way hiw things are deployed. But, well, it is like that. Maybe you have suggestion for that situation without my idea of haveing a server on the developer Mac?

             

            Luns

            • 3. Re: Does a FM Server performan faster than a client hosted FM database?
              Mike_Mitchell

              If you don't have a process in place for updating your production database after changes are made, you need one. Developing on a production database is risky. What happens if a change is made and it causes a problem? How do you back it out? Worse, what happens if the change damages data in your production system because it wasn't tested first? Your users will lose everything in the system from that point back to the most recent backup (which, in the case of an FMP-hosted system, might be a long time).

               

              Based on my experience, I agree with Wim. You really do need a process in place to perform testing in a sandbox environment prior to moving any changes into production. It's a question of risk management. You can install FMS on the developer box if you want to perform that function there, but it shouldn't be a production system and a development system at the same time. They should be separate systems.

               

              As far as what the process should look like, it can vary based on your needs. You can use a protocol that shuts down the production system and imports the data to the new version, then pushes the new version up to the production server. You can use a synchronization protocol, if you like (there are commercial solutions if you don't have the time or expertise to roll your own). You can also take advantage of the Separation Model, which can, in some cases, alleviate some (though often not all) of the need to migrate data. Whatever process you choose will depend on your specific needs. But you really do need some kind of process for it.

               

              Just my $0.02.

               

              Mike

              • 4. Re: Does a FM Server performan faster than a client hosted FM database?
                wimdecorte

                Luna.media wrote:

                 

                Yeas, I use FMP as the host. As the database works fast on the server ( I tested that) and slow on FMP as the host, what kind of design flaws do you have in mind?

                 

                That's an impossible question to answer.  We'd need to know much more about what is slow and how it is designed in the first place.

                 

                Luna.media wrote:

                 

                I know you can argue that tis shouldnot be the way hiw things are deployed. But, well, it is like that.

                 

                I think that is the underlying issue to address.  It really shoud NOT be like that.  It's hard to think of any scenario where FM development is somewhat critical where you would not have a dev server.  It does not even have to be an expensive one but you need one.

                 

                And I fully agree with Mike: you need a process in place to migrate data.  That a big must have.  You don't want to develop on the live system but you want to upgrade your dev/testing server with relevant data when you let your users test.  Otherwise they could bog you down with "but I did that yesterday and I don't see it here".

                 

                And you'll need those kind of routines for a go-live anyway.  You can roll your own (we've all done it) or you can look into something like RefreshFM from Goya.

                • 5. Re: Does a FM Server performan faster than a client hosted FM database?
                  bigtom

                  I used to do the peer hosting thing with FM12. Connection count forced me to FMS13. This was the best thing I ever did. So much faster and reliable.

                   

                  I also took some advice and got a development server, not very fancy. This gets more important as your data grows and you suddenly think what would happen if it was gone or down for even one day while changing hardware and restoring a backup. How much would that impact the business?

                   

                  You need some sort of process as mentioned. Whatever it is come up with something that works for you.