These current comments apply only to FMP or FMGo connections, and not yet to WebDirect which we will test on another occasion.
Filemaker server 12 java problem series#
Hence we can send off a series of autonomous scripts (each simulating a client using server) from a single client side UI, watch the CPU history and statistics in Server Admin Console, watch the event log recording the statistics for each transaction, and load up the Server to the point of near choking by adding or disconnecting virtual clients. To investigate this we are using a method of testing FileMaker Server with “virtual clients” - server side scripts whose completion we do not await. Whilst FMI’s own technical recommendations are a good starting point they can appear more than a little conservative when compared with many people’s own experience - where often 4 cores appear to support 20 or more users. Depending on the complexity of what it is being asked to do, Server can handle quite a few calls a second, so it would be interesting to work out how many… and perhaps to relate the number of remote calls to calls per user? That is a great deal of horse-power – but we should note that FMI have reduced their recommended cores per user to about half of what they advised just a few months ago.Īnd that’s a “remote call”, not a “remote user”. fig2 – FMI Recommended Hardware Configurations for Server inc FileMaker WebDirect It is not entirely clear what resource is required if one does not plan to deploy FM Webdirect.
Filemaker server 12 java problem full#
There really is very little middle ground, so when you look at the server statistics and watch the graph crawling along the floor - thinking that you are not really using its full capacity - you may in fact be deluding yourself, as we will illustrate.Īn understanding of what server hardware resource is required to ensure that a specific number of users receive a consistently good service is clearly essential but such information is - surprisingly - a little hard to come by.įMI themselves suggest that Server – if you wish to use FM WebDirect – requires a separate CPU core - effectively a separate CPU - to handle each pair of concurrent remote calls efficiently in a smaller deployment and then gradually fewer cores as the server power and user numbers increase. fig1 – user numbers increase until Server chokes – suddenly and dramatically – with little warning. The Deskspace server performance test shown in fig 1 illustrates a common scenario as the number of users increases and suddenly performance declines – dramatically. However, Server is a binary product, in the sense that it either performs “good” or it performs “bad” - very slowly, but very reliably - as it grinds through its backlog until its load has reduced sufficiently for it to catch up on its queued calls and return to “good” mode. Why this is importantįileMaker Server 13 is a wonderful and very reliable product, provided (as with any product) you recognise, understand and work within its limits. Summary: we will describe, discuss and illustrate the statistics that enable you to understand the why and how of FileMaker Server performance and suggest means of delivering a predictable and acceptable performance to your users. Editor’s Note: Today I am pleased and honored to present the first in what I hope will become a series of articles by guest author Nick Lightbody of Deskspace Systems Ltd.
0 kommentar(er)
