1 Reply Latest reply on Oct 11, 2010 10:08 AM by philmodjunk

    Database structure and performance



      Database structure and performance



      I'am looking form some experiences or proffesional advice. I created system from cca 20 database fields. Each contain one or two tables. There is one main field which contain all layouts scripts and main setting data. All data are stored in separated fields, connected as external data source to the main.

      This is very efficient because our system is upgraded on the run. Simply by replacing the main field, all changes are applied to users. But it means that all users (30 - 35) has open 20 databases (hidden).

      We are using FMSA 10 (or 11) on Win 2003 server, on double dual core processor. Question is: Can this structure reduce the performance of fmsa? Because I see sometimes the service fmsa consume 80% of CPU and then, there is no response from the server.


        • 1. Re: Database structure and performance

          Your post accurately describes the trade offs. Personnaly, I would put all the data tables in a single file and then put all the interface elements, (layouts, scripts, etc) in a second file. That leaves you with just two files and most updates will simply require swapping out the old interface file for new without having to import any data. The assumption this approach is built on is that most updates update the interface rather than the structure of your tables.

          Also, make sure you have downloaded the most recent update for your server software version as they may patch a bug that is causing your excessive CPU load.